Ergonomics And Nudging For Health Safety And

Happiness Results Of Sie 2022 Tommaso Bellandi

download

https://ebookbell.com/product/ergonomics-and-nudging-for-health-
safety-and-happiness-results-of-sie-2022-tommaso-
bellandi-49419842

Explore and download more ebooks at ebookbell.com

Here are some recommended products that we believe you will be
interested in. You can click the link to download.

Behavioral Economics And Finance Leadership Nudging And Winking To

Make Better Choices 1st Ed Julia Puaschunder

https://ebookbell.com/product/behavioral-economics-and-finance-
leadership-nudging-and-winking-to-make-better-choices-1st-ed-julia-
puaschunder-22502032

Human Agency And Behavioral Economics Nudging Fast And Slow 1st
Edition Cass R Sunstein Auth

https://ebookbell.com/product/human-agency-and-behavioral-economics-
nudging-fast-and-slow-1st-edition-cass-r-sunstein-auth-5883782

Nudging Possibilities Limitations And Applications In European Law And

Economics 1st Edition Klaus Mathis

https://ebookbell.com/product/nudging-possibilities-limitations-and-
applications-in-european-law-and-economics-1st-edition-klaus-
mathis-5483620

Ergonomics And Health Aspects Of Work With Computers International

Conference Ehawc 2009 Held As Part Of Hci International 2009 San Diego
Ca Usa July 1924 2009 Proceedings 1st Edition Annelise De Jong

https://ebookbell.com/product/ergonomics-and-health-aspects-of-work-
with-computers-international-conference-ehawc-2009-held-as-part-of-
hci-international-2009-san-diego-ca-usa-
july-1924-2009-proceedings-1st-edition-annelise-de-jong-2023406
Ergonomics And Health Aspects Of Work With Computers International
Conference Ehawc 2011 Held As Part Of Hci International 2011 Orlando
Fl Usa July 914 2011 Proceedings 1st Edition Merle Blok

https://ebookbell.com/product/ergonomics-and-health-aspects-of-work-
with-computers-international-conference-ehawc-2011-held-as-part-of-
hci-international-2011-orlando-fl-usa-july-914-2011-proceedings-1st-
edition-merle-blok-2450230

Ergonomics And Health Aspects Of Work With Computers International

Conference Ehawc 2009 Held As Part Of Hci International 2009 San Diego
Ca Usa July 1924 2009 Proceedings 1st Edition Annelise De Jong

https://ebookbell.com/product/ergonomics-and-health-aspects-of-work-
with-computers-international-conference-ehawc-2009-held-as-part-of-
hci-international-2009-san-diego-ca-usa-
july-1924-2009-proceedings-1st-edition-annelise-de-jong-4141640

Ergonomics And The Management Of Musculoskeletal Disorders Martha J

Sanders

https://ebookbell.com/product/ergonomics-and-the-management-of-
musculoskeletal-disorders-martha-j-sanders-4411278

Ergonomics And Human Factors For A Sustainable Future 1st Ed Andrew

Thatcher

https://ebookbell.com/product/ergonomics-and-human-factors-for-a-
sustainable-future-1st-ed-andrew-thatcher-7156292

Ergonomics And Musculoskeletal Disorders Msds In The Workplace A

Forensic And Epidemiological Analysis Graveling

https://ebookbell.com/product/ergonomics-and-musculoskeletal-
disorders-msds-in-the-workplace-a-forensic-and-epidemiological-
analysis-graveling-9952860
Springer Series in Design and Innovation 28

Tommaso Bellandi
Sara Albolino
Ennio Bilancini Editors

Ergonomics
and Nudging
for Health,
Safety and
Happiness
Results of SIE 2022
Springer Series in Design and Innovation 28

Editor-in-Chief
Francesca Tosi, University of Florence, Florence, Italy

Series Editors
Claudio Germak, Politecnico di Torino, Turin, Italy
Francesco Zurlo, Politecnico di Milano, Milan, Italy
Zhi Jinyi, Southwest Jiaotong University, Chengdu, China
Marilaine Pozzatti Amadori, Universidade Federal de Santa Maria, Santa Maria,
Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil
Maurizio Caon , University of Applied Sciences and Arts, Fribourg, Switzerland
Springer Series in Design and Innovation (SSDI) publishes books on innovation and
the latest developments in the fields of Product Design, Interior Design and Commu-
nication Design, with particular emphasis on technological and formal innovation, and
on the application of digital technologies and new materials. The series explores all
aspects of design, e.g. Human-Centered Design/User Experience, Service Design, and
Design Thinking, which provide transversal and innovative approaches oriented on the
involvement of people throughout the design development process. In addition, it covers
emerging areas of research that may represent essential opportunities for economic and
social development.
In fields ranging from the humanities to engineering and architecture, design is
increasingly being recognized as a key means of bringing ideas to the market by trans-
forming them into user-friendly and appealing products or services. Moreover, it provides
a variety of methodologies, tools and techniques that can be used at different stages of
the innovation process to enhance the value of new products and services.
The series’ scope includes monographs, professional books, advanced textbooks,
selected contributions from specialized conferences and workshops, and outstanding
Ph.D. theses.
The volumes of the series are single-blind peer-reviewed.
Keywords: Product and System Innovation; Product design; Interior design; Commu-
nication Design; Human-Centered Design/User Experience; Service Design; Design
Thinking; Digital Innovation; Innovation of Materials.
How to submit proposals
Proposals must include: title, keywords, presentation (max 10,000 characters), table of
contents, chapter abstracts, editors’/authors’ CV.
In case of proceedings, chairmen/editors are requested to submit the link to confer-
ence website (incl. relevant information such as committee members, topics, key dates,
keynote speakers, information about the reviewing process, etc.), and approx. number
of papers.
Proposals must be sent to: series editor Prof. Francesca Tosi (francesca.tosi@unifi.
it) and/or publishing editor Mr. Pierpaolo Riva ([email protected]).
Tommaso Bellandi · Sara Albolino ·
Ennio Bilancini
Editors

Ergonomics and Nudging

for Health, Safety
and Happiness
Results of SIE 2022
Editors
Tommaso Bellandi Sara Albolino
Azienda USL Toscana Nord Ovest Organizzazione Sviluppo e Qualità
Lucca, Italy Policlinico Umberto I
Rome, Italy
Ennio Bilancini
IMT School for Advanced Studies
Lucca, Italy

ISSN 2661-8184 ISSN 2661-8192 (electronic)

Springer Series in Design and Innovation
ISBN 978-3-031-28389-5 ISBN 978-3-031-28390-1 (eBook)
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-28390-1

© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license
to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023
This work is subject to copyright. All rights are solely and exclusively licensed by the Publisher, whether
the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of
illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission
or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar
methodology now known or hereafter developed.
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication
does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant
protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use.
The publisher, the authors, and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book
are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the
editors give a warranty, expressed or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors
or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in
published maps and institutional affiliations.

This Springer imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature Switzerland AG
The registered company address is: Gewerbestrasse 11, 6330 Cham, Switzerland
 Contents

Ergonomics and Nudging . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

Tommaso Bellandi, Sara Albolino, and Ennio Bilancini

How to Promote Cooperation for the Well-Being of Individuals

and Societies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Valerio Capraro

Home Care 2041: Signals from the Future . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26

M. del Gaudio, E. Fabbri, F. Fraboni, G. Frangioni, F. Masci, F. Millo,
G. Miranda, M. Pistolesi, R. Randazzo, A. Rondi, A. Rosa, and A. Augusto

Use of Digital Devices to Assess Vaccine Hesitancy and Promote Pertussis

Vaccination Among Pregnant Women . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
Dario Menicagli, Guglielmo Arzilli, Elena Lucaccini,
Giuditta Scardina, Daniele Sironi, Lara Tavoschi, and Pierluigi Lopalco

Nudging for Hand Hygiene . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45

G. Frangioni, K. P. Biermann, M. de Luca, C. Furiesi, D. E. Papini,
E. Parente, M. Pirinu, L. Tacchini, L. Vagnoli, V. Vizzarro, and M. Guasti

ERGOMeyer for Patient Safety and Quality of Care: Ergonomics

in a Children’s Hospital . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
G. Frangioni, M. de Luca, C. Furiesi, D. E. Papini, E. Parente,
M. Pirinu, L. Tacchini, V. Vizzarro, and L. Vagnoli

An Action Research for System Change in Nursing Homes (NHs) . . . . . . . . . . . . 59

Giulia Lefosse, Laura Rasero, and Tommaso Bellandi

Comfort for the Health of Premature Patients . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71

M. del Gaudio, A. Lama, C. Vedetta, and S. Moschella

Patient Safety Walkrounds for Improving Safety and Quality of Care

in the Penitentiary System of the Tuscany Region . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79
Giulia Dagliana, Mateo Ameglio, Luca Amoroso, Sara Bellachioma,
Tommaso Bellandi, Roberto Bocchieri, Valerio Cellesi,
Domenico Cerullo, Paola Morganti, Sandra Rogialli,
Antonella Vassalle, Angela Venezia, and Franco Scarpa
vi Contents

Design and Developement of Safety Walkrounds in a Local Healthcare

Trust: Methodological Approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88
G. Terranova, T. Bellandi, I. Razzolini, C. Rigali, V. Gelmi, and F. Bellomo

Understanding and Communicating Risk: The Case of COVID-19 . . . . . . . . . . . . 98

Davide Coraci, Alessandro Demichelis, and Gustavo Cevolani

Natural Surgeon Interfaces: Perspectives and Examples of Intuitive Laser

Control Systems in the µRALP Project . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111
Giacinto Barresi, Darwin G. Caldwell, and Leonardo S. Mattos

Real-Time Data Analysis and 3D Representation for Postural Assessment

in Manufacturing Processes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124
Chiara Carnazzo, Stefania Spada, Sebastiano Lamacchia,
Federico Manuri, Andrea Sanna, and Maria Pia Cavatorta

A Training to Relieve Work-Related Technostress: The Project “Tutela 2” . . . . . 133

Maria Donata Orfei, Desirèè Estela Porcari, Sonia D’Arcangelo,
Francesca Maggi, Dario Russignaga, and Emiliano Ricciardi

Human Behavior Modelling in Socio-technical System Simulation:

A Case Study on Air Traffic Control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 140
Gabriella Duca and Antonella Frisiello

Human Factors and Safety Implications on Air Traffic Controllers

and Remote Pilots for the RPAS Introduction in Controlled Airspace . . . . . . . . . . 148
Vittorio Sangermano, Gabriella Duca, Riccardo Rocchio,
and Edoardo Filippone

Public Services Innovation Through Gamification. From Concept

to Implementation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 157
Antonella Frisiello, Mario Chiesa, Ruth S. Contreras-Espinosa,
and Jose Luis Eguia-Gomez

Themes of a Research Agenda for Sustainable Human Centred Design . . . . . . . . 168

Erminia Attaianese and Emilio Rossi

Domotics for the Independence and Participation in Daily Life of People

with Severe Disabilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 179
Edda Capodaglio, Alessandro Panighi, and Monica Panigazzi

Design, Inclusion and Sustainable Development: Guidelines

for the Creation of a People-Centred Urban Park . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 186
Francesca Tosi, Alessia Brischetto, Ester Iacono, and Alessandra Rinaldi
 Contents vii

Nudging Joyful and Active Ageing in Workplace: Framework

and Dissemination . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 198
Ilaria Oberti, Francesca Plantamura, and Isabella T. Steffan

Author Index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 207

 Ergonomics and Nudging

Tommaso Bellandi1(B) , Sara Albolino2 , and Ennio Bilancini3

1 Tuscany Northwest Trust, Lucca, Italy
[email protected]
2 Umberto I Academic Hospital, Roma, Italy
3 IMT School for Advanced Studies, Lucca, Italy

1 Ergonomics, human factors and behavioural economics

Ergonomics is the science of interactions, systems’ wise and design oriented. In the
past three decades there has been a continuous and systematic move of researchers and
professionals to affirm and clarify why human factors are the fundamental elements of
every system (Dul et al. 2012; Wilson 2014; Xie and Carayon 2015). This has pushed the
International Ergonomics Association and national societies to systematically pair these
terms in the definition of the discipline, as well as in the name of national societies. For
the purpose of the contributions in this book, we use the term Ergonomics and Human
Factors (EHF). Nowadays, it is widely accepted that humans, with their limitations and
potentials, are the crucial factors for the success of a system and that their individual
factors, physical-cognitive-emotional-social, have to be addressed and seriously con-
sidered in the design and management of technologies, organizations, and institutions
(Thaler and Sunstein 2009; Vicente. 2015). In fact, even highly automated systems
require human intervention for maintenance and especially to manage the unexpected
or critical incidents (Weick and Sutcliffe 2001; Reason 2017).
Basic sciences such as biology, psychology and neuro-psysiology have seen a dra-
matic improvement in the understanding of the nature of human beings and the impact of
their environment on their behavior, providing also some evidence for the explanation of
complex behavioral patterns in social interactions and effectively clarifying an increas-
ing set of connections between body and mind (Rizzolati 2005; Maturana and Varela
2012; Cryan and Dinan 2012; Damasio and Carvalho 2013; Alòs-Ferrer, 2018a). Also,
traditional western philosophy based on humanism and individualism has been ques-
tioned, thanks to the recognition of scientific evidence behind the different conceptions
of human and individual life laid down in eastern philosophy and religions (Braidotti
2016), as well as in the proven benefits of simple practices such as meditation (Goleman
and Davison 2017) and fasting (Brandhorst and Longo 2019).
On the other side of the curve, leading from micro to macro systems, political, social
and economic sciences are considering the new evidence from basic sciences and the
extraordinary potential of computing to systematically collect and automatically elabo-
rate data on human behaviors with the aim of designing and integrating policies or mar-
keting strategies into physical and virtual interfaces (Carlsson and Johansson-Stenman
2012; Rice 2013; Chetty 2015; Thaler and Ganser 2015; Thaler 2018; Gigerenzer 2018;
Bicchieri and Dimant 2019; Bilancini et al. 2020). In this regard, Behavioral economics

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023

T. Bellandi et al. (Eds.): SIE 2022, SSDI 28, pp. 1–9, 2023.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-28390-1_1
2 T. Bellandi et al.

(BE) has recently been extremely successful in promoting awareness regarding the role
of human factors in political, economical, and social phenomena and, at the same time, in
generating influential think tanks and research-based policy agencies that have demon-
strated to be capable of influencing actual policy-making (Team B.I. 2010; Cassidy 2011)
in a wide spectrum of sectors (health care, environmental protection, traffic management,
tax compliance, pensions, school choice, lifestyle, addictions, technological standards)
and at different governance levels (hospital, municipality, utility firm, local government,
ministry, central government, army).
The success of BE in this regard has been obtained in two steps: first, by providing
compelling experimental evidence that many relevant economic and social phenomena
could not be explained relying only on the basis of the assumption of “homo oeco-
nomicus” (i.e., the simplification that economic agents are only interested in their own
material benefits; Henrich et al. 2001; Gintis, 2005; Fher and Gintis. 2007; Bowles
and Polanya-Reyes. 2012; Bowles 2016) and the assumption of “unbounded rationali-
ty” (i.e., costless and exact computation, costless attention, infinite memory, bayesian
elaboration of information; Simon 1990; Jones 1999; Gingerenzer and Todd. 1999; De
Martino et al. 2006; Evans 2017; Bilancini and Boncinelli 2018), and, second, by pro-
viding alternative assumptions on human behaviour and decision-making, inspired by
experimental evidence, which encompass other-regarding preferences (e.g., envy for
social status, Bilancini and Boncinelli 2014; 2019; social norms, Bicchieri 2016; altru-
ism, Choi and Bowles, 2007; reciprocity, Bowles and Gintis 2004; Bilancini et al. 2022;
fairness, Fehr and Gächter 2000; inequity aversion, Fehr and Schmidt 1999; spite, West
and Gardner 2010; in-group favoritism, Bilancini et al. 2020) and bounded rationality
(e.g., limited memory, Mullainathan 2002; reliance on heuristics, Alòs-Ferrer, 2018b;
Belloc et al. 2019; inattention, Gabaix 2019; cognitive biases, Enke et al. 2021; multiple
selves, Alòs-Ferrer and Strack 2014; costly cognition, Bilancini and Boncinelli 2021;
non-bayesian elaboration of information, Bilancini and Boncinelli 2018). It is not nec-
essary to go back to Kanheman and Tversky’s Prospect Theory (Barberis 2013) or, more
recently, to Thaler and Sunstein’s Nudge Theory (Hertwig & Grüne-Yanoff, 2017), to
realise that BE has deeply impacted the study of human behaviour and its interaction with
the social and technological environments. How to promote cooperation in the work-
place? How to minimize the likelihood of mistakes by professionals? How is human
behavior affected when the actual interaction is with an AI rather than another human
decision-maker? All these questions have been answered - or are being answered – also
thanks to the tools, methods and theoretical framework provided by BE.
We believe in the encounter between EHF and BE provides a threefold opportunity:
(i) to improve the understanding of safe and effective interactions between humans and
the other elements of a system; (ii) to extend and aggregate methods and tools for the
design of usable and attractive physical and virtual artifacts; (iii) to contribute to the
establishment of a new ethics for public and private institutions based on joy, happiness,
satisfaction and well-being.
In this introductory chapter of the Proceedings of the SIE 2022 national congress,
we briefly outline the current and potential value of the encounter between EHF and BE
in the 3 above-mentioned areas, trying to connect the following chapters with existing
literature as well as our individual, and diverse, scientific perspectives.
 Ergonomics and Nudging 3

2 Safe and Effective Interactions in Dynamic Complex Systems

The development of a human being throughout her lifetime is deeply rooted and depen-
dent on the interactions with other humans and the environment. Our knowledge of
the world, skills and competences unfold from basic potentials given at birth through
continuous interactions with parents, families and communities permeated by one or
more referent cultures (Cole 1998; Vygotsky. 2014). Interactions occur since the very
early days of life with the mediation of an uncountable number of artifacts, that are the
results of adaptation and creativity of current and previous generations, facing problems,
creating solutions and opportunities for interactions in the natural and human-made envi-
ronment (Wenger 1999). The pervasivity and ubiquity of technologies during the past
two decades have created unprecedented scenarios, on one side through the physical
implant of devices, on the other side due to the neverending connection to humans and
non-humans via portable or wearable digital interfaces (Harari 2016).
Today, and even more in the foreseeable future, EHF and BE share the opportunity to
provide new visions, to inform research directions and contribute to the development of
new products and services, bringing together the accumulated knowledge for an updated
understanding of dynamic interactions between humans and non-humans in complex
systems, blended within physical and virtual environments.
Traditional questions such as cooperation vs competition between individuals and
groups, autonomy vs centralization of planning and control in organizations, substitution
vs integration of workers and robots in industries and services are already under review
as we can read through the chapters of this book.
From transportations to manufacturing, from health services to health protection
and promotion, we can see how the combination of a bio-psycho-social model enhances
comprehension and inclusion of the multiplicity of dimensions and factors that shape
human condition and potentials. When the focus is on the system and the interactions
of its parts, rather than on single components, then the challenge for researchers and
practitioners moves from the classic distinction between three types of interactions clas-
sified in physical, cognitive and social ergonomics to an integrated and updated version
of holistic ergonomics. Human beings are constantly embedded in exchange of: strength
through physical interaction with the hardware surrounding their environment; infor-
mation retrieval through the five senses by means of concrete and virtual interfaces;
relations through emotions, rules and values. As we cannot separate body and mind for
health and wellbeing, a worker from her tools in safe and effective activity, a nurse from
her identity and position within a hospital or a community, we have to apply an holistic
approach to face even the apparently simple tasks, such as hand washing to prevent the
spread of hospital acquired infections (Hollnagel et al. 2015).
Moreover, the focus on micro, meso or macro system levels can somehow be merged
thanks to the evidence from BE, that demonstrates the connections between behaviors,
management of daily lives at home or in the workplaces, with policies and values. An
inaccurate understanding of individual attitudes, preferences and determinants of behav-
iors may contribute to the failure of entire systems, while a comprehensive approach may
provide options to the individuals that are actionable and easy to understand at the micro-
level, respectful and flexible to different rules and practices at the meso-level, transparent
and coherent to the reference values at the macro-level (Bellandi and Albolino 2019).
4 T. Bellandi et al.

This second movement of integration can create the conditions for informed decision
making as well as for social engagement, as we have seen for example, with lights and
shadows, during the vaccination campaign for Covid-19.
The convergence of the two movements to integrate physical-cognitive-social inter-
actions on the one side and micro-meso-macro systems dynamics on the other side is a
theoretical perspective that we suppot and that the reader may appreciate by reading the
chapters of this book and playing to connect the dots which support this vision.

3 Mixed Methods to Study and Design Convergent Systems

If we accept a new vision of human conditions and systems of interactions, then we need
to update methods and tools to study the present and shape the future.
First of all, the traditional separation between subjective and objective data, as well
as between qualitative and quantitative methods do not fit with the complexity of a
holistic approach to interactions and a merge of system’s levels either in the controlled
laboratory situation or in real life scenarios (Poth 2018). The definition, collection and
elaboration of objective data through quantitative methods is fundamental to understand
questions, generalize eventual patterns of observed relations and make some predictions
for the future which can be extended to the same problems under uncertain conditions.
Anyway, how people make sense of a problem in a real context and make decisions to
enact a behavioral response is something that cannot be understood just by objective
data (Weick 1995).
The meaning of a problem for an individual in the real world can be different from
those observed in experiments, depending on many variables that vary according to indi-
vidual’s and system’s conditions. Therefore, a combination of subjective and objective
methods, that is typical of EHF and BE can widen the view of researchers and the toolbox
of practitioners.
A good example comes from the use of wearable sensors and portable devices to
track physical conditions, actions and interactions in the environment, where recognized
metrics are systematically combined with subjective data to understand human efforts in
physical and cognitive tasks. Devices that originated in the military industry for perfor-
mance measurement and enhancement, such as exoskeletons, are today top priorities for
research in manufacturing and in healthcare. Implantable, wearable and portable devices
create the condition to collect and use an enormous amount and variety of data, along
with the power of calculation available at an accessible price.
Actually, the potential of wearable sensors and portable devices to routinely collect
and elaborate big data is already a reality, even though the production and use of this
data for research or marketing purposes represent a challenge for privacy, industrial
and political relations. On the one hand, collective events such as trends and effects
of a pandemics can be automatically tracked through routine collection of population
data, on the other hand a rehabilitation treatment can be hyper-personalized by creating
solutions on the basis of individual data.
According to our view, a strong public engagement in big data collection and analysis
is the condition to provide a perspective to scientists and professionals where sensitive
data can be used under the control of the individual who is the producer and should be
the owner of her data.
 Ergonomics and Nudging 5

EHF has a tradition of participatory approach and user engagement in evaluation of

problems and design of solutions. It is a strong basis to be applied in the new landscape
where artificial intelligence is substituting humans in decision making in work systems
and daily lives. Evidence from BE may then help to understand and design decision mak-
ing processes related to the purchase or the use of new technologies. The disseminated
computing, taking more and more the characteristic of robots which replace, cooperate
or lead interactions with humans within convergent systems, can be addressed with a
combination of methods and tools from EHF and BE.

4 A New Ethics for Research and Practice in Behavioral Sciences

A new vision on human systems and a multi-disciplinary methodology to investigate
and shape interactions require a new ethics, capable of encompassing the challenges for
humanity in the young but extreme era of anthropocene (Lewis and Maslin 2015).
The current official definition of ergonomics dates back to 2000 and seems out of
date especially when it refers to “the profession that applies theory, principles, data,
and methods to design in order to optimize human well-being and overall system per-
formance.” The optimization of human well-being and system performance should be
based on a balance between individual and population health and well-being, opportu-
nities provided by today’s and future technologies and the limited natural resources of
our planet. It is maybe the time for considering an update of the definition that encom-
passes the overlaps with BE and, more in general, with the science of human behavior,
interaction and decision-making (Gintis 2014).
Finally, let us stress that, on the ethics side, we also believe that any ambitious
research agenda should be informed with frugality to: avoid waste, protect common
resources and public goods, promote prosociality towards present and future generations,
taking into account the different cultural values and welcoming pluralism. These are
fundamental premises for peace (Shiva 2005), as well as to prevent the loss of lives
due to missed access to care and cure. The authors’ contributions in this book aim at
embracing the challenge to improve health, wellbeing and happiness in different areas
of working and daily lives.

5 Presentation of the Book

The Congress took place on the 2nd, 3rd and 4th of May 2022 in Lucca, hosted at the
IMT School for Advanced Studies Lucca, that is a public university for higher education
and research with a special statute that focuses on the analysis of economic, societal,
technological and cultural systems.
The editors invited authors to submit the long papers that have been peer reviewed
with recommendation to publish.
The majority of selected contributions were on the track of ergonomics and nudging
in health-care systems (9), followed by ergonomics and technological innovation (4),
design for all (3), health and safety in industry 4.0 (2), neuroergonomics (1), ergonomics
and nudging to face the pandemic (1).
6 T. Bellandi et al.

The invited speaker Valerio Capraro presented a state of the art review on cooperation
and pro-social behavior and some perspectives on the strategies to facilitate cooperative
interactions between individuals and groups.
Augusto and colleagues reported the original research project, started in 2021, on
the occasion of the World Usability Day, to innovate EHF methods by integrating user
experience and strategic foresight to design scenarios for home care in 2041.
In the work of Menicagli et al. and in Frangioni et al. some good examples of
ergonomic and nudging techniques have been used to promote vaccination among preg-
nant women and to improve hand hygiene in a pediatric hospital, while in the paper
dedicated to “ErgoMeyer” Frangioni and its colleagues present a selection of EHF
intervention in the context of an academic pediatric hospital.
In the papers of Lefosse, Del Gaudio, Dagliana and Terranova different qualita-
tive studies and interventions are reported with the common denominator of complex-
ity of systems and dynamic interactions in place among healthcare workers, patients,
organizational procedures and technologies.
Coraci and colleagues presented an interesting analysis of risk communication strate-
gies during Covid-19 pandemic and their potential effects on people’s understanding
about reliability of lab tests, by using up to date evidence from EHF and BE.
Barresi and his group illustrated the ongoing research at the Italian Institute of Tech-
nology on EHF applications to enhance surgeon performance by improving physical and
cognitive interactions with tools and the patient’s body.
Carnazzo and colleagues presented an innovative approach to evaluate risks of
musculoskeletal disorders in manufacturing, through a combination of motion capture
techniques and virtual reality with existing risk assessment tools.
Orfei reported an original research, including a new tool to evaluate occupational
stress related to the intensive use of new technology among bank workers and a training
intervention to mitigate stress based on behavioral techniques.
Duca and Sangermano described two different packages of a European research
program to model human behaviors in air traffic control, tackle a dynamic system with
updated rules and increasing volume of work and providing reliable tools to train and
evaluate performance with simulations.
Frisiello and colleagues is one of the most original contributions at the congress, as
they showed the potential of gamification to support decision making of commuters in
busy urban centers.
Attaianese and Rossi proposed a research agenda to integrate concepts from sus-
tainable development within human centered design, with an original classification of
innovative approaches for the design of systems and artifacts.
Capodaglio and her colleagues presented a EHF perspective on domotics solutions
for people with disabilities, by using a complex case study to illustrate potential and
limits of current technologies and approach to provide assistive tools and an enabling
home environment.
Tosi and her research team described the guidelines they prepared for the design
of people centered urban parks, in order to create an urban environment that facilitates
physical activity and healthy social life in a residential area.
 Ergonomics and Nudging 7

Oberti et al. also proposed an evidence-based approach to support institutions in

the design of urban environments, integrating EHF and BE methods with design for all
principles to sustain healthy life in the aging population.

References
Alós-Ferrer, C.: A review essay on social neuroscience: can research on the social brain and
economics inform each other? J. Econ. Literat. 56(1), 234–264 (2018)
Alós-Ferrer, C.: A dual process diffusion model. J. Behav. Decis. Mak. 31(2), 203–218 (2018)
Alós-Ferrer, C., Strack, F.: From dual processes to multiple selves: Implications for economic
behavior. J. Econ. Psychol. 41, 1–11 (2014)
Barberis, N.C.: Thirty years of prospect theory in economics: a review and assessment. J. Econ.
Perspect. 27(1), 173–196 (2013)
Bellandi, T., Albolino, S.: Human factors and ergonomics for a safe transition to digital health.
Stud. Health Technol. Inf. 265, 12–21 (2019)
Belloc, M., Bilancini, E., Boncinelli, L., D’Alessandro, S.: Intuition and deliberation in the stag
hunt game. Sci. Rep. 9(1), 1–7 (2019)
Bicchieri, C., Dimant, E.: Nudging with care: the risks and benefits of social information. Public
Choice, 1–22 (2019)
Bicchieri, C.: Norms in the wild: How to diagnose, measure, and change social norms. Oxford
University Press, Oxford (2016)
Bilancini, E., Boncinelli, L., Capraro, V., Paolo, R.D.: The effect of norm-based messages on
reading and understanding COVID-19 pandemic response governmental rules. J. Behav. Econ.
Policy 4(S), 45–55 (2020)
Bilancini, E., Boncinelli, L.: Rational attitude change by reference cues when information
elaboration requires effort. J. Econ. Psychol. 65, 90–107 (2018)
Bilancini, E., Boncinelli, L.: Instrumental cardinal concerns for social status in two-sided matching
with non-transferable utility. Eur. Econ. Rev. 67, 174–189 (2014)
Bilancini, E., Boncinelli, L.: Wage inequality, labor income taxes, and the notion of social status.
Economics 13(1) (2019)
Bilancini, E., Boncinelli, L., Celadin, T.: Social value orientation and conditional cooperation in
the online one-shot public goods game. J. Econ. Behav. Organ. 200, 243–272 (2022)
Bilancini, E., Boncinelli, L.: When market unraveling fails and mandatory disclosure backfires:
Persuasion games with labeling and costly information acquisition. J. Econ. Manag. Strategy
30(3), 585–599 (2021)
Bilancini, E., Boncinelli, L.: Signaling to analogical reasoners who can acquire costly information.
Games Econ. Behav. 110, 50–57 (2018)
Bilancini, E., Boncinelli, L., Capraro, V., Celadin, T., Di Paolo, R.: Do the right thing for whom?
An experiment on in group favouritism, group assorting and moral suasion. Judgm. Decis.
Mak. 15(2), 182 (2020)
Bowles, S., Polania-Reyes, S.: Economic incentives and social preferences: substitutes or
complements? J. Econ. Lit. 50(2), 368–425 (2012)
Bowles, S.: The Moral Economy: Why Good Incentives Are No Substitute For Good Citizens.
Yale University Press, New Haven (2016)
Bowles, S., Gintis, H.: The evolution of strong reciprocity: cooperation in heterogeneous
populations. Theor. Popul. Biol. 65(1), 17–28 (2004)
Braidotti, R.: Posthuman critical theory. In: Banerji, D., Paranjape, M.R. (eds.) Critical posthu-
manism and planetary futures, pp. 13–32. Springer, New Delhi (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/
978-81-322-3637-5_2
8 T. Bellandi et al.

Brandhorst, S., Longo, V. D.: Protein quantity and source, fasting-mimicking diets, and longevity.
Advances in Nutrition, 10(Supplement_4), S340–S350 (2019)
Cassidy, J.: The cabinet office behavioural insights team. BMJ, 342 (2011)
Gigerenzer, G.: The bias bias in behavioral economics. Rev. Behav. Econ. 5(3–4), 303–336 (2018)
Chetty, R.: Behavioral economics and public policy: a pragmatic perspective. Am. Econ. Rev.
105(5), 1–33 (2015)
Carlsson, F., Johansson-Stenman, O.: Behavioral economics and environmental policy. Annu. Rev.
Resour. Econ. 4(1), 75–99 (2012)
Choi, J. K., Bowles, S.: The coevolution of parochial altruism and war. Science 318(5850), 636–640
(2007)
Cole, M.: Cultural psychology: a once and future discipline. Harvard university press, Cambridge
(1998)
Cryan, J.F., Dinan, T.G.: Mind-altering microorganisms: the impact of the gut microbiota on brain
and behaviour. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 13(10), 701–712 (2012)
Damasio, A., Carvalho, G.B.: The nature of feelings: evolutionary and neurobiological origins.
Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 14(2), 143–152 (2013)
De Martino, B., Kumaran, D., Seymour, B., Dolan, R.J.: Frames, biases, and rational decision-
making in the human brain. Science 313(5787), 684–687 (2006)
Dul, J., et al.: A strategy for human factors/ergonomics: developing the discipline and profession.
Ergonomics 55(4), 377–395 (2012)
Evans, J.S.B.: Dual process theory: perspectives and problems. Dual process theory 2, 137–155
(2017)
Enke, B., et al.: Cognitive biases: mistakes or missing stakes?. The Review of Economics and
Statistics, 1–45 (2021)
Henrich, J., et al.: In search of homo economicus: behavioral experiments in 15 small-scale
societies. Am. Econ. Rev. 91(2), 73–78 (2001)
Fehr, E., Gintis, H.: Human motivation and social cooperation: experimental and analytical
foundations. Ann. Rev. Sociol. 33(1), 43–64 (2007)
Fehr, E., Gächter, S.: Fairness and retaliation: the economics of reciprocity. J. Econ. Perspect.
14(3), 159–181 (2000)
Fehr, E., Schmidt, K.M.: A theory of fairness, competition, and cooperation. Q. J. Econ. 114(3),
817–868 (1999)
Gabaix, X.: Behavioral inattention. In: Handbook of Behavioral Economics: Applications and
Foundations 1, vol. 2, pp. 261–343 (2019). North-Holland
Gintis, H., Bowles, S., Boyd, R.T., Fehr, E. (Eds.): Moral sentiments and material interests: the
foundations of cooperation in economic life (Vol. 6). MIT press (2005)
Gintis, H.: The bounds of reason: game theory and the unification of the behavioral sciences-revised
edition. Princeton University Press, Princeton (2014)
Gigerenzer, G., Todd, P.M.: Simple heuristics that make us smart. Oxford University Press, Oxford
(1999)
Goleman, D., Davidson, R.: The science of meditation: how to change your brain, mind and body.
Penguin UK (2017)
Harari, Y.N.: Homo Deus: a brief history of tomorrow. Random house (2016)
Hollnagel, E., Wears, R.L., Braithwaite, J.: From Safety-I to Safety-II: a white paper. The resilient
health care net: published simultaneously by the University of Southern Denmark, University
of Florida, USA, and Macquarie University, Australia (2015)
Jones, B.D.: Bounded rationality. Annu. Rev. Polit. Sci. 2(1), 297–321 (1999)
Lewis, S.L., Maslin, M.A.: Defining the anthropocene. Nature 519(7542), 171–180 (2015)
Maturana, H.R., Varela, F.J.: Autopoiesis and cognition: the realization of the living (Vol. 42).
Springer Science & Business ssMedia (2012)
 Ergonomics and Nudging 9

Mullainathan, S.: A memory-based model of bounded rationality. Q. J. Econ. 117(3), 735–774

(2002)
Poth, C.N.: Innovation in mixed methods research: a practical guide to integrative thinking with
complexity. Sage (2018)
Reason, J.: The human contribution: unsafe acts, accidents and heroic recoveries. CRC Press,
London (2017)
Rice, T.: The behavioral economics of health and health care. Ann. Rev. Public Health 34(1),
431–447 (2013)
Rizzolatti, G.: The mirror neuron system and its function in humans. Anat. Embryol. 210(5),
419–421 (2005)
Thaler, R.H., Sunstein, C.: Nudge: Improving Decisions About Health, Wealth, and Happiness.
Penguin, New York (2009)
Vicente, K.J.: The human factor: revolutionizing the way people live with technology. Routledge
(2013)
Shiva, V.: Earth democracy: justice, sustainability and peace. Zed Books (2005)
Simon, H.A.: Bounded rationality. In Utility and probability (pp. 15–18). Palgrave Macmillan,
London (1990)
Team, B.I.: Applying behavioural insight to health. Cabinet Office, London (2010)
Thaler, R. H., Ganser, L.J.: Misbehaving: the making of behavioral economics (2015)
Thaler, R.H.: From cashews to nudges: the evolution of behavioral economics. Am. Econ. Rev.
108(6), 1265–1287 (2018)
Vygotsky, L.S.: Imagination and creativity in childhood. J. Russian East Eur. Psychol. 42(1), 7–97
(2004)
Weick, K.E.: Sensemaking in organizations (Vol. 3). Sage (1995)
Weick, K.E., Sutcliffe, K.M.: Managing the unexpected (Vol. 9). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass
(2001)
Wenger, E.: Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge University
Press, Cambridge (1999)
West, S.A., Gardner, A.: Altruism, spite, and greenbeards. Science 327(5971), 1341–1344 (2010)
Wilson, J.R.: Fundamentals of systems ergonomics/human factors. Appl. Ergon. 45(1), 5–13
(2014)
Xie, A., Carayon, P.: A systematic review of human factors and ergonomics (HFE)-based
healthcare system redesign for quality of care and patient safety. Ergonomics 58(1), 33–49
(2015)
 How to Promote Cooperation for the Well-Being
of Individuals and Societies

Valerio Capraro(B)

Middlesex University, London NW44BT, UK

[email protected]

Abstract. The most successful human societies are those that have found better
ways to promote cooperative behaviour. Yet, cooperation is individually costly
and, therefore, it often breaks down, leading to enormous social costs. In this arti-
cle, I review the literature on the mechanisms and interventions that are known to
promote cooperative behaviour in social dilemmas. In iterated or non-anonymous
interactions, I focus on the five rules of cooperation, as well as on structural
changes, involving the cost or the benefit of cooperation, or the size of the inter-
acting group. In one-shot and anonymous interactions, I focus on the role of inter-
nalised social heuristics as well as moral preferences for doing the right thing. For
each account, I summarize the available experimental evidence. I hope that this
review can be helpful for social scientists working on cooperation and for leaders
and policy makers who aim at promoting social cooperation or teamwork.

Keywords: Cooperation · Prisoner’s Dilemma · Public goods game · Social

heuristics · Moral suasion

1 Introduction
Cooperative behaviour is defined as paying a cost to give a greater benefit to one or
more other people. Since the benefit is greater than the cost, cooperation increases
the total payoff of the group made of all people involved in the interaction. For this
reason, cooperative behaviour is considered by social scientists to be one of the key
ingredients for a successful society (Boyd et al. 2003; Fehr and Gächter 2002; Fehr
and Fischbacher 2003; Tomasello et al. 2005; Nowak, 2006; Rand and Nowak 2013;
Perc et al. 2017). Moreover, while individual cooperation increases social well-being,
collective cooperation not only increases social well-being, but also increases personal
well-being: each individual within a society made of cooperators is better off than each
individual within a society made of defectors.
Yet, since cooperation is individually costly, it often breaks down. So, one of the
most important research programs across social sciences seeks to find ways to promote
and sustain cooperative behaviour. In this article, I will review the literature on this topic.
Obviously, this field of research is enormous, and, in the limited space of these
pages, I can only scratch its surface. To try to counterbalance this, I will include several
references, where the interested reader can find more detailed information. I hope that
this review can be a useful starting point for social scientists, policy makers and leaders
who are interested in how to promote cooperative behaviour.

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023

T. Bellandi et al. (Eds.): SIE 2022, SSDI 28, pp. 10–25, 2023.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-28390-1_2
 How to Promote Cooperation for the Well-Being 11

2 Models of Cooperation
Cooperation is formally studied through social dilemmas. These are strategic interac-
tions in which N > 1 individuals get to decide between two or more actions. Among these
actions, there is one that benefits the group and one that benefits the individual. This
tension between self-interest and collective interest is what defines a social dilemma.
Moving down from general to particular, social scientists have defined different social
dilemmas meant to conceptualise cooperative behaviour in different prototypical cir-
cumstances. In this article, I will focus on the two most-studied social dilemmas: the
prisoner’s dilemma and the public goods game.

2.1 Cooperation Between Two Agents: The Prisoner’s Dilemma

In the prisoner’s dilemma there are two players, each of whom has two available strate-
gies, cooperate or defect. Cooperators pay a cost c to give a greater benefit b to the other
player. Defectors pay no cost and generate no benefit.
The conflict between individual and collective interest descends from the assumption
b > c. Indeed, if both individuals cooperate, they each pay the cost of cooperation but also
enjoy its benefit; therefore, they each get b – c. However, each individual has an incentive
to deviate from cooperation to get the full payoff b, obtained by saving their own cost of
cooperation, while keeping the benefit of the other’s cooperative act. However, if both
individuals reason this way, they both end up with 0, which is smaller than b – c, the
payoff that they would have gotten if they had both resisted the temptation to defect.
There are also other ways to formalise cooperative behaviour between two agents,
including the traveller’s dilemma (Basu 1994), the Bertrand competition (Bertrand 1883),
and the centipede game (Binmore 1987). While I acknowledge the importance of these
models, in this article I will focus on the prisoner’s dilemma (for two individuals), because
the theoretical mechanisms and the experimental regularities discussed below have been
developed and tested mainly using the prisoner’s dilemma, but they are expected to work,
in a similar fashion, in the other 2-player social dilemmas.

2.2 Cooperation Among N Agents: The Public Goods Game

The most popular N-player social dilemma is the public goods game, which is meant
to conceptualise situations in which a group of individuals get to decide how much to
contribute to a common project.
Formally, in the public goods game, each of N individuals gets to decide how much,
if any, of their initial endowment e they want to contribute to the public good. Let ci be
the contribution of individual i, the total amount contributed by all individuals is then
c1 + … + cN . Let a be the “marginal return of cooperation”, the payoff of individual i
is defined as e – ci + a*(c1 + … + cN ), that is, i receives the portion of the endowment
that she decided to keep plus a proportion a of the common good. The marginal return
of cooperation a is assumed to be greater than 1/N and smaller than 1. This assumption
guarantees that the public goods game is a social dilemma: the collective interest would
be maximised if all individuals contribute the whole endowment, but each individual
has an incentive to deviate and keep the whole endowment.
12 V. Capraro

There are also other ways to conceptualise cooperation among N individuals, as the
N-player prisoner’s dilemma and the piecewise linear-then-constant public goods game,
among others (threshold public goods game, resource dilemma, volunteer’s dilemma,
etc.). Although in this article I will not focus on these games, I think it is worth defining
them because this allows to shed light on the different effects that group size can have
on cooperative behaviour depending on the social dilemma.
In the public goods game as defined above, there is the underlying assumption that the
individual return for full cooperation increases linearly with the number of individuals,
that is, if all individuals cooperate, then each of them gets e*a*N, which increases
linearly with N. In some practical contexts, however, this assumption is unrealistic. For
studying these situations, one can consider social dilemmas where the assumption of
linearity of the relationship between group size and individual return for full cooperation
is replaced with other assumptions. Here, I discuss two prototypical cases. One is the
N-player prisoner’s dilemma. Over the years, several definitions of this game have been
proposed at various levels of generality (e.g., Hamburger 1973; Carroll 1988). Here, I
define an N-player prisoner’s dilemma to be any N-player social dilemma where the
individual return for full cooperation is constant with the number of players. This game
is useful to formalise situations in which the individual benefit of cooperation does not
depend on the number of players, but, still, one needs all players to cooperate (Yao
and Darwen 1994; Grujić et al. 2012; Barcelo and Capraro 2015). Another practically
relevant N-player social dilemma is the piecewise linear-then-constant public goods
game, where the return of cooperation increases linearly until a certain group size N 0 ,
and then becomes constant. This conceptualises situations in which the production of
the public good reaches a plateau due to natural limits in the production (Yang et al.
2013; Capraro and Barcelo 2015).

3 Iterated or Non-anonymous Interactions

Most of our everyday interactions are repeated or with people who are not completely
anonymous. For example, we may interact with a friend of a friend, or with a company
that has been recommended to us. In these cases, cooperation can evolve even among
self-interested agents, according to five fundamental rules that have been summarised
by Nowak (2006) in the case of the prisoner’s dilemma. I review these rules below. For
each rule, I will also review the experimental evidence. Most of the experimental work
is taken from Rand and Nowak (2013)’s review, which I recommend for further details.

3.1 Kin Selection

Kin selection allows to explain cooperation between relatives. The general assumption
of the theory is that, if r is the probability of sharing a gene, then an individual does not
only receive its payoff, but also a proportion r of the others’ payoff. Applying this to
the prisoner’s dilemma, it follows that, if r*b > c, then it becomes individually optimal
to cooperate. This rule takes the name of Hamilton’s rule, from the pioneering work
of biologist William D. Hamilton (e.g., Hamilton 1964). The experimental evidence in
support of this rule is, however, scarce, mainly because it is difficult to isolate the effect
 How to Promote Cooperation for the Well-Being 13

of genetic relatedness from other components that are usually associated with genetic
relatedness, such as long-term relationships and the possibility of future interactions.
Despite these technical difficulties, Madsen et al. (2007) were able to analyse data
from two different cultures while controlling for three potential sources of confound,
generational effects, sexual attraction, and reciprocity. In doing so, they found that people
behaved in accordance with Hamilton’s rule.

3.2 Direct Reciprocity

Direct reciprocity permits to explain the evolution of cooperation in the context of

repeated interactions between the same individuals. In this case, I can cooperate with
you today, to receive the benefit of your future cooperation tomorrow. However, this
leads to a cooperative equilibrium only when the probability of another encounter is
large enough, so that the future benefit of cooperation, discounted by the probabil-
ity of another encounter, is greater than the present cost of cooperation. Formally, let
w be this probability of another encounter, one needs w*b > c. Experimental studies
have shown that, indeed, the rate of cooperation in indefinitely iterated social dilem-
mas increases when the probability of future encounters increases (Roth and Murnighan
1978; Murnighan and Roth 1983; Duffy and Ochs 2009; Dal Bó and Fréchette 2011;
Fudenberg et al. 2012).

3.3 Indirect Reciprocity

In case of repeated interactions with rematching after each round, people may become
more likely to cooperate when they have information about the others’ reputation. In its
simplest form, reputation simply coincides with the behaviour in the past interaction. In
this case, people can selectively cooperate with those who have cooperated in the previous
round. Anticipating this, people may become more inclined to cooperate from the first
round. Several experiments have indeed shown that people tend to cooperate with people
who have cooperated in the past and that the presence of a reputational mechanism can
promote and sustain cooperation (Bolton et al. 2005; Milinski et al. 2006; Rockenbach
and Milinski 2006; Seinen and Schram 2006; Rand et al. 2009; Pfeiffer et al. 2012).
The fact that people assign value to knowing others’ behaviour is shown also by the fact
that people invest a lot of time in acquiring information about the behaviour of others
(Dunbar et al. 1997; Sommerfeld et al. 2007). Indeed, it can be shown that cooperation
can be supported by indirect reciprocity only if the probability of knowing someone’s
reputation is greater than c/b (Nowak and Sigmund 1998).

3.4 Network Reciprocity

Most human interactions are not random, but structured. Network reciprocity allows to
explain the evolution of cooperation on graphs, where nodes represent actors and edges
represent interactions between actors. The idea is that, if interactions are structured,
then clusters of cooperators can protect themselves from the invasion of defectors. This
however requires that the ratio b/c is large enough. A simple rule that works on many
14 V. Capraro

graphs and with several strategy updating mechanisms is b/c > k, where k is the average
degree of the graph (Ohtsuki et al. 2006). Rand et al. (2014a) showed experimentally
that cooperation indeed can evolve in graphs satisfying this rule. Instead, if this rule is
not satisfied, the rate of cooperation in structured populations is typically the same as in
well-mixed populations (Grujić et al. 2010; Traulsen et al. 2010; Suri and Watts 2011;
Gracia-Lázaro et al. 2012; Grujić et al. 2012a). Some work also explored the evolution of
cooperation on dynamic networks, where people can break old links and create new ones
after each interaction. It has been found that people tend to break links with defectors
and create links with cooperators, and this leads to an additional increase in the rate of
cooperation, compared to static networks, both in mathematical models (Bilancini &
Boncinelli, 2009; Bilancini et al. 2018) and in economic experiments (Fehl et al. 2011;
Rand et al. 2011; Wang et al. 2012).

3.5 Group Selection

When there is group selection, that is, competition between groups, groups of coop-
erators might outperform groups of defectors, leading to the evolution of cooperation
(Richerson et al. 2016). A mathematically simple necessary condition for the evolution
of cooperation can be found assuming rare group splitting and weak selection: let n be
the maximum group size and m the number of groups, cooperation may evolve only if
b/c > 1 + n/m (Traulsen and Nowak 2006). To the best of my knowledge, this specific
formula has not been tested experimentally. However, there is abundant evidence that the
presence of intergroup competition can lead to the evolution of intragroup cooperation
(Erev et al. 1993; Gunnthorsdottir and Rapoport 2006; Puurtinen and Mappes 2009),
even when there is no monetary prize associated with winning the competition (Tan and
Bolle 2007; Böhm and Rockenbach 2013).

3.6 Cost, Benefit, and Group Size

Beyond the five mechanisms above, there are also structural changes in the social dilem-
mas that might promote the evolution of cooperation, by facilitating the application
of one of the five rules of cooperation. Two of these structural changes are straight-
forward. In fact, the five mathematical conditions described above imply that, when b
increases or c decreases, the evolution of cooperation becomes easier, in the sense that
the set of the values of the other parameters for which cooperation can evolve grows
larger. Experimentally, the fact that cooperative behaviour in iterated prisoner’s dilem-
mas depends positively on b and negatively on c was already observed in the early book
of Rapoport and Chammah (1965). Similar findings have been reported also in the iter-
ated public goods game, where an increase in the marginal return of cooperation a is
typically associated with an increase in cooperative behaviour, both with partner- and
with random-rematching (Gunnthorsdottir et al. 2007).
For social dilemmas with N > 2 players there is another parameter that may affect
cooperative behaviour, group size. However, the effect of group size on cooperation
depends on the type of social dilemma: in the iterated public good game, larger groups
tend to cooperate more (Isaac et al. 1994), whereas, in the iterated prisoner’s dilemma,
larger groups tend to cooperate less (Grujić et al. 2012b). The intuition behind this result
 How to Promote Cooperation for the Well-Being 15

is that, in the prisoner’s dilemma, the individual return for full cooperation is constant as
the group size increases, so it becomes more and more difficult to get the same payoff,
and this may work as an incentive to defect; on the other hand, in the public goods game,
the individual return for full cooperation increases linearly with the group size, and this
might incentivise people to cooperate, despite a potentially larger absolute number of
defectors.1

3.7 Punishment and Reward

Numerous studies using iterated social dilemmas have shown that the presence of pun-
ishment or reward tend to increase cooperative behaviour (Yamagishi et al. 1986; Ostrom
et al. 1992; Fehr & Gächter, 2000; Rand et al. 2009), despite the presence of occasional
anti-social punishers, people who punish cooperative behaviour (Herrmann et al. 2008).
In other words, if people interact knowing that they might be punished or rewarded for
their behaviour, they tend to cooperate more. This happens because, on average, people
tend to punish defectors and reward cooperators. This finding can be interpreted as a
form of reciprocity (direct or indirect, depending on whether the punisher/rewarder is
affected by the choice of the defector/cooperator) and therefore it could be seen as a way
in which one can apply two of the five rules of cooperation in reality; indeed, institu-
tional punishment of defectors is perhaps the oldest-known way to promote cooperative
behaviour within a society.

4 One-Shot and Anonymous Interactions

In one-shot and anonymous games, the standard theory of rational, payoff-maximising
behaviour predicts that people never cooperate. However, behavioural experiments have
repeatedly shown that some people do cooperate even in these contexts (Rapoport and
Chammah 1965). Usually, the structural changes in the strategic interaction that promote
cooperation in iterated games (while maintaining the anonymity of the interactions) pro-
mote cooperation also in one-shot games. Specifically, decreasing the cost of cooperation
(Engel and Zhurakhovska 2016) or increasing its benefit (Capraro et al. 2014) do promote
cooperative behaviour; increasing the size of the group promotes cooperative behaviour
in the public goods games, but reduces it in the N-player prisoner’s dilemma (Barcelo
and Capraro 2015). In one-shot anonymous games and in iterated games with random-
rematching, there is also some research on the effect of group size on cooperation in the
piecewise linear-then-constant public goods game, but the results are mixed: one study
found an inverted-U relationship, such that intermediate size groups were the most coop-
erative (Capraro & Barcelo 2015), but a subsequent study failed to replicate this finding
and found a positive effect of group size on cooperation (Pereda et al. 2019).
The presence of punishment or reward increases cooperation also in one-shot games
(Capraro et al. 2016; Capraro and Barcelo 2021a). Moreover, cues that suggest that the
1 This suggests that there might be intermediate cases in which the individual return of full
cooperation increases too slowly with the group size, leading to a null or even a negative effect
of group size on cooperation. For example, it could be interesting to study the relationship
between group size and cooperation in a logarithmic public goods game.
16 V. Capraro

interaction may not be anonymous or one-shot can increase cooperative behaviour. For
example, information about the other participants’ behaviour can increase cooperation,
via conditional cooperation (Fischbacher et al. 2001; Kocher et al. 2008).
However, this does not explain why people cooperate in one-shot and anonymous
social dilemmas. In this section, I review the main frameworks that have been proposed
in the last decade.

4.1 Social Heuristics

One prominent account contends that people internalise strategies that are useful in
their everyday life and use them as heuristics when they happen to interact in novel
situations. Specifically, most real-life interactions are not one-shot and anonymous, but
they are repeated or non-anonymous, they happen with friends or colleagues, or with
individuals about whom we have information regarding their past behaviour. In these
contexts, people may learn that cooperative behaviour pays off in the long run, especially
when its cost is low, or its benefit is high (or in groups of special size). People might then
learn and internalise these heuristics and apply them in one-shot and anonymous games.
This framework takes the name of Social Heuristics Hypothesis (Rand et al. 2014b).
Over the last decade, scholars have sought to experimentally test this framework.
The idea behind the experimental approach is the following: if cooperation in one-shot
and anonymous games is driven by heuristics, then experimental manipulations aimed at
increasing reliance on heuristics should promote cooperative behaviour. The non-trivial
experimental challenge is how to promote the use of heuristics in the laboratory. Scholars
have developed four different techniques: time pressure, ego depletion, cognitive load,
and conceptual primes of intuition2 . I review them below:

• When people have little time to think about the details of a decision problem, they
might be more likely to rely on general heuristics. Therefore, putting people under
time pressure might increase their reliance on heuristics.
• When people are depleted of their self-control, they might lose their ability to calculate
the details of the decision problem at hand and, therefore, become more likely to use
general heuristics. Self-control can be depleted through an ego depletion task, such
as the Stroop task or the e-hunting task, or, in general, through any task that requires
the use of self-control.
• When people’s working memory is reduced by a concurrent task, their ability to
make the complex reasoning needed to evaluate the situation they are facing might
be reduced as well, making them more likely to follow simple heuristics. Working
2 To be precise, there is also a fifth technique: neurostimulation. Neurostimulation methods come
from the idea that high-level, reflective reasoning comes primarily from a specific brain area, the
right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (rDLPFC). Therefore, deactivating this area, using transcra-
nial magnetic stimulation or transcranial direct current stimulation, might make people more
likely to follow their heuristics. However, in this article, I decided not to focus on this method
because, to the best of my knowledge, there are no studies testing the effect of neurostimulation
of the rDLPFC on cooperative behaviour using prisoner’s dilemmas or public goods games.
There is only one study, but it uses an asymmetric public goods game (Li et al. 2018). I hope
that future work can fill this gap.
 How to Promote Cooperation for the Well-Being 17

memory can be depleted using cognitive load tasks, such as keeping in mind a long
sequence of numbers (typically seven).
• Conceptual primes of intuition refer to a class of nudges that promote reliance on
intuitive thinking. These nudges can be implicit or explicit. An instance of an implicit
nudge could be that people, before playing a social dilemma, are given a set of letters
that they can use to form words, and these words are related to intuitive decision
making, (e.g., “intuition”, “emotion”, or “quick”). An explicit nudge could be to ask
people to follow their intuition or their emotion, or to write about a time of their life
in which following their intuitions worked out well.

It is important to note that none of these methods is perfect. Time pressure has
been criticised because it is usually too long to eliminate reflective reasoning and access
quick heuristics (Libet 2009; Soon et al. 2008). Ego depletion may even do something
fundamentally different from deactivating reflective reasoning and activating reflexive
reactions; moreover, the very basic assumption that self-control draws on a limited
resource also came under scrutiny (Inzlicht et al. 2014). Cognitive load tasks might
interact with the primary task, while conceptual primes, especially the explicit ones,
may generate experimenter demand effect (Rand 2016).3
Being aware of the limitations of these experimental manipulations, scholars have
turned to meta-analytic techniques to find out whether, overall (i.e., putting all the studies
together, regardless of the cognitive manipulation being used), intuition favours cooper-
ative behaviour. An earlier meta-analysis found a positive effect of promoting intuition
on cooperation (Rand 2016). However, this result was later criticised by another meta-
analysis, which found a null effect (Kvarven et al. 2019), which in turn was criticised
by a third meta-analysis, which replicated the original positive effect (Rand 2019). The
debate about whether promoting intuition increases cooperative behaviour is still ongo-
ing (see Capraro (2019) for a review). However, there is a result that has been consistently
found in all meta-analyses: explicit primes of emotions increase cooperative behaviour.
To make an example, an explicit message (shown to participants before making their
decision) used to prime reliance on emotions is the following:
Sometimes people make decisions by using feeling and relying on their emotion.
Other times, people make decisions by using logic and relying on their reason.
Many people believe that emotion leads to good decision-making. When we use
feelings, rather than logic, we make emotionally satisfying decisions.
Please make your transfer decision by relying on emotion, rather than reason.
This prime was initially introduced by Levine et al. (2018) and shown to increase
cooperative behaviour in the prisoner’s dilemma. More recently, it has been applied also
to other contexts. For example, it has been shown to reduce speciesism, that one can
interpret as a form of cooperation between humans and non-human animals (Caviola and
Capraro 2020). However, this very same prime has also been shown to reduce intentions

3 For completeness, I mention that also neurostimulation tools have been criticised, as they are
usually applied over the brain area of interest. This implicitly assumes that the stimulus spreads
uniformly towards the target area. However, this is generally not true, but depends on the
topography of the cortical surface, which, in some cases, can even reverse the polarity of the
stimulus (Berker et al., 2013; Rahman et al., 2013).
18 V. Capraro

to wear a face mask during the COVID-19 pandemic (Barcelo & Capraro, 2021). This
raises an issue that I think it deserves attention. While previous research has focused
on “general cooperation” using stylised games, it is possible that particular forms of
cooperation, especially those we are unfamiliar with, may require reflective reasoning.
Another important point to reflect upon is that the aforementioned work regards the
effect of “general emotions” on cooperation. Specific emotions may affect cooperation
in different ways, depending on the emotions themselves. For example, Polman and Kim
(2013) found that inducing anger decreases cooperation in the public goods game, while
inducing disgust increases cooperation. Motro et al. (2017) found that inducing anger
decreases cooperation in a prisoner’s dilemma, but only when the other participant was
angry as well. Chierchia et al. (2021) found that inducing fear increased cooperation
compared to inducing anger, but none of them was different from the control condition.

4.2 Moral Preferences

Another account that has been proposed is the morality preferences hypothesis, accord-
ing to which cooperative behaviour in one-shot and anonymous interactions is primarily
driven by moral preferences for doing the right thing (Capraro and Perc 2021). This
account is not mutually exclusive with the social heuristics hypothesis because per-
sonal norms – internal standards about what is right or wrong – may come from the
internalisation of behaviours that have been learned in everyday interactions.
The experimental evidence on the morality preferences hypothesis began with a
paper by Biziou van Pol et al. (2015), which found that cooperative behaviour in the
one-shot prisoner’s dilemma correlates positively with honest behaviour in a sender-
receiver game where a sender can send a dishonest message and increase both his payoff
and that of the receiver. Therefore, the honest choice in this game is considered as a
measure of moral preferences beyond monetary outcomes. The fact that this choice cor-
relates with cooperative behaviour suggests that cooperative behaviour is partly driven
by moral preferences beyond monetary outcomes. A subsequent article by Kimbrough
and Vostroknutov (2016) showed that cooperative behaviour in the public goods game
correlates with norm-following in a task where subjects, moving a virtual person on a
computer screen using a keyboard, get to decide how long to stand at a virtual traffic-
light which displays the red colour, losing time and money, in a context where they
receive no negative payoff if they just cross the road disregarding the traffic-light. The
decision in this norm-following task is anonymous, has nothing to do with social inter-
actions, and does not have any material consequences. Therefore, although Kimbrough
and Vostroknutov (2016) do not mention personal norms in their paper, I think it is fair to
consider their task as a measure of people’s propensity to follow their personal norms. In
this light, their results may be interpreted as providing further support for the assumption
that cooperative behaviour in one-shot and anonymous social dilemmas is partly driven
by moral preferences. Then, Capraro and Rand (2018) demonstrated that cooperative
behaviour in the prisoner’s dilemma correlates with the moral choice in the trade-off
game, regardless of the trade-off game frame, thus providing additional evidence that
 How to Promote Cooperation for the Well-Being 19

cooperative behaviour is partly driven by moral preferences beyond monetary outcomes.4

Recently, Bašić and Verrina (2021) provided evidence that personal norms are comple-
mentary to social norms in predictive cooperative behaviour, and Catola et al. (2021)
showed that both social and personal norms are correlated with cooperative behaviour
in the public goods game, but the predictive power of personal norms is higher.
This line of research suggests that nudges that make the personal norm salient might
be effective at increasing cooperative behaviour. However, to the best of my knowledge,
only two papers explored this question.5
Capraro et al. (2019) explored the effect of two norm-nudges, one based on the
injunctive norm, and one based on the personal norm. Specifically, before playing a
prisoner’s dilemma, participants answered one of the following questions:
Personal norm question: “What do you personally think is the morally right thing to
do in this situation?”.
Injunctive norm question: “What do you think your society considers to be the morally
right thing to do in this situation?”.
After answering this question, participants played a one-shot prisoner’s dilemma.
The results showed that both messages increased cooperative behaviour compared to
a baseline, where participants made their decision without being asked any question.
Moreover, the effect of the two nudges was similar.
Mieth et al. (2021) tested the effect of moral labels on cooperative behaviour in the
prisoner’s dilemma. They found that labelling the available options with morally loaded
words, such as “I cooperate” vs. “I cheat”, increases cooperation, compared to using
neutral labels “Option A” vs. “Option B”.
Thus, these two studies provide evidence that making the personal norm salient tend
to increase cooperative behaviour. However, it seems that also making the injunctive
norm salient increases cooperative behaviour to a similar extent, suggesting that also
injunctive norms may play an important role in determining one-shot and anonymous
cooperation. It might be possible that different people are nudged by different norms;
for example, it could be that people high in internalised moral identity tend to react to
personal norm-nudges, while people high in symbolised moral identity tend to react to
injunctive norm-nudges.6 In general, studying the role of potential moderators could be
a promising route for future research. Moreover, perhaps surprisingly, I could not find
any work testing the effective of making the descriptive norm salient.7 One can imagine
that this would also increase cooperative behaviour via conditional cooperation, but it is
4 I refer to Capraro, Halpern and Perc (in press) for a review article providing many examples of
situations in which people’s behaviour cannot be explained using outcome-based utility func-
tions but require language-based utility functions; moral preferences can be seen as particular
language-based utility functions, where morally loaded language carries the moral utility of an
action.
5 There is also one work exploring the effect of moral messages in the iterated prisoner’s dilemma.
Dal Bó and Dal Bó (2014) found that making participants read the Golden Rule increases
cooperation in the iterated prisoner’s dilemma, although the effect vanishes after a few rounds.
6 Internalised moral identity measures the extent to which being moral is important to one’s
self-concept, while symbolised moral identity measures the extent to which people care about
looking moral (Aquino and Reed 2002).
7 The descriptive norm represents what other people actually do (Cialdini et al. 1990).
20 V. Capraro

an open question if this is actually the case and, if so, how the magnitude of this effect
compares with the magnitude of the effects of the other norm-nudges.

5 Conclusion

In this article, I reviewed the main mechanisms and interventions that are known to
promote cooperative behaviour in social dilemma games. I summarise them in Table 1.
I also highlighted some open questions that I hope can be answered in future work. I
summarise them in Table 2.

Table 1. Summary of the mechanisms and interventions that are known to increase cooperative
behaviour in social dilemmas.

Iterated or non-anonymous games

 Genetic relatedness increases cooperative behaviour
 Future interactions increase cooperative behaviour
 Public reputation increases cooperative behaviour
 Networked interactions increase cooperative behaviour, especially if one can break old
links and create new ones
 Group competition increases cooperative behaviour withing groups
 Reducing the cost of cooperation or increasing its benefit increases cooperative behaviour
 Larger groups are more cooperative in the public goods game, but less cooperative in the
prisoner’s dilemma
 Punishment or reward increases cooperative behaviour

One-shot and anonymous games

 Reducing the cost of cooperation or increasing its benefit increases cooperative behaviour
 Larger groups are more cooperative in the public goods game, but less cooperative in the
prisoner’s dilemma
 Cues suggesting that interactions might be repeated or non-anonymous increase coopera-
tive behaviour
 Inducing general emotions increases cooperative behaviour
 Personal norm-nudges increase cooperative behaviour
 Injunctive norm-nudges increase cooperative behaviour
 How to Promote Cooperation for the Well-Being 21

Table 2. Open questions.

Open questions
 What is the effect of group size on cooperation in the piecewise linear-then-constant public
goods game? If inverted-U, is it possible to estimate the size of the group that produces
the largest public good?
 Does intuition promote cooperation?
 Do specific forms of cooperation – arguably those we are not familiar with – require delib-
erative thinking?
 Which specific emotions promote cooperation? Which undermine it?
 What is the effect of neurostimulation of the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex on cooperative
behaviour?
 Do descriptive norm nudges increase cooperative behaviour? How does their effect com-
pare with the effect of personal and injunctive norm-nudges?
 Are people who respond to personal norm nudges somehow different from people who re-
spond to injunctive norm nudges?

References
Aquino, K., Reed, A., II.: The self-importance of moral identity. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 83, 1423–
1440 (2002)
Barcelo, H., Capraro, V.: Group size effect on cooperation in one-shot social dilemmas. Sci. Rep.
5, 7937 (2015)
Bašić, Z., Verrina, E.: Personal norms—and not only social norms—shape economic behavior. MPI
Collective Goods Discussion Paper, (2020/25)
Basu, K.: The traveler’s dilemma: paradoxes of rationality in game theory. Am. Econ. Rev. 84,
391–395 (1994)
de Berker, A.O., Bikson, M., Bestmann, S.: Predicting the behavioral impact of transcranial direct
current stimulation: Issues and limitations. Front. Hum. Neurosci. 7, 613 (2013)
Bertrand, J.: Book review of theorie mathematique de la richesse social and of recherches sur les
principes mathematiques de la theorie des richesses. J. des Savants (1883)
Bilancini, E., Boncinelli, L.: The co-evolution of cooperation and defection under local interaction
and endogenous network formation. J. Econ. Behav. Organ. 70, 186–195 (2009)
Bilancini, E., Boncinelli, L., Wu, J.: The interplay of cultural intolerance and action-assortativity
for the emergence of cooperation and homophily. Eur. Econ. Rev. 102, 1–18 (2018)
Binmore, K.: Modeling rational players: part I. Econ. Philos. 3, 179–214 (1987)
Biziou van Pol, L., Haenen, J., Novaro, A., Occhipinti-Liberman, A., Capraro, V.: Does telling
white lies signal pro-social preferences? Judgm. Decis. Mak. 10, 538–548 (2015)
Böhm, R., Rockenbach, B.: The inter-group comparison – intra-group cooperation hypothesis:
comparisons between groups increase efficiency in public goods provision. PLoS ONE 8,
e56152 (2013)
Bolton, G.E., Katok, E., Ockenfels, A.: Cooperation among strangers with limited information
about reputation. J. Public Econ. 89, 1457–1468 (2005)
Boyd, R., Gintis, H., Bowles, S., Richerson, P.J.: The evolution of altruistic punishment. Proc.
Natl. Acad. Sci. 100, 3531–3535 (2003)
Capraro, V.: The dual-process approach to human sociality: a review. Available at SSRN 3409146
(2019)
Capraro, V., Barcelo, H.: Group size effect on cooperation in one-shot social dilemmas II:
curvilinear effect. PLoS ONE 10, e0131419 (2015)
22 V. Capraro

Capraro, V., Barcelo, H.: Punishing defectors and rewarding cooperators: do people discriminate
between genders? J. Econ. Sci. Assoc. 7(1), 19–32 (2021a). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40881-
021-00099-4
Capraro, V., Barcelo, H.: Telling people to “rely on their reasoning” increases intentions to wear
a face covering to slow down COVID-19 transmission. Appl. Cogn. Psychol. 35, 693–699
(2021b)
Capraro, V., Cococcioni, G.: Rethinking spontaneous giving: extreme time pressure and ego-
depletion favor self-regarding reactions. Sci. Rep. 6, 27219 (2016)
Capraro, V., Giardini, F., Vilone, D., Paolucci, M.: Partner selection supported by opaque reputation
promotes cooperative behavior. Judgm. Decis. Mak. 11, 589–600 (2016)
Capraro, V., Halpern, J. Y., Perc, M.: From outcome-based to language-based preferences. J. Econ.
Literature (in press)
Capraro, V., Jagfeld, G., Klein, R., Mul, M., de Pol, I.V.: Increasing altruistic and cooperative
behaviour with simple moral nudges. Sci. Rep. 9, 11880 (2019)
Capraro, V., Jordan, J.J., Rand, D.G.: Heuristics guide the implementation of social preferences
in one-shot Prisoner’s Dilemma experiments. Sci. Rep. 4, 6790 (2014)
Capraro, V., Perc, M.: Mathematical foundations of moral preferences. J. R. Soc. Interface 18,
20200880 (2021)
Capraro, V., Rand, D.G.: Do the right thing: experimental evidence that preferences for moral
behavior, rather than equity and efficiency per se, drive human prosociality. Judgm. Decis.
Mak. 13, 99–111 (2018)
Carroll, J.W.: Iterated N-player prisoner’s dilemma games. Philos. Stud.: Int. J. Philos. Anal.
Tradit. 53, 411–415 (1988)
Catola, M., D’Alessandro, S., Guarnieri, P., Pizziol, V.: Personal norms in the online public good
game. Econ. Lett. 207, 110024 (2021)
Caviola, L., Capraro, V.: Liking but devaluing animals: emotional and deliberative paths to
speciesism. Soc. Psychol. Pers. Sci. 11, 1080–1088 (2020)
Chierchia, G., Parianen Lesemann, F.H., Snower, D., Singer, T.: Cooperation across multiple game
theoretical paradigms is increased by fear more than anger in selfish individuals. Sci. Rep. 11,
9351 (2021)
Cialdini, R.B., Reno, R.R., Kallgren, C.A.: A focus theory of normative conduct: recycling the
concept of norms to reduce littering in public places. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 58, 1015–1026
(1990)
Dal Bó, P., Fréchette, G.R.: The evolution of cooperation in infinitely repeated games: experimental
evidence. Am. Econ. Rev. 101, 411–429 (2011)
Dal Bó, E., Dal Bó, P.: Do the right thing: the effects of moral suasion on cooperation. J. Public
Econ. 117, 28–38 (2014)
Duffy, J., Ochs, J.: Cooperative behavior and the frequency of social interaction. Games Econom.
Behav. 66, 785–812 (2009)
Dunbar, R.I., Marriott, A., Duncan, N.D.: Human conversational behavior. Hum. Nat. 8, 231–246
(1997)
Engel, C., Zhurakhovska, L.: When is the risk of cooperation worth taking? The prisoner’s dilemma
as a game of multiple motives. Appl. Econ. Lett. 23, 1157–1161 (2016)
Erev, I., Bornstein, G., Galili, R.: Constructive intergroup competition as a solution to the free
rider problem: a field experiment. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 29, 463–478 (1993)
Evans, J.S.B.T., Stanovich, K.E.: Dual-process theories of higher cognition: advancing the debate.
Perspect. Psychol. Sci. 8, 223–241 (2013)
Fehl, K., van der Post, D.J., Semman, D.: Co-evolution of behaviour and social network structure
promotes human cooperation. Ecol. Lett. 14, 546–551 (2011)
Fehr, E., Fischbacher, U.: The nature of human altruism. Nature 425, 785–791 (2003)
 How to Promote Cooperation for the Well-Being 23

Fehr, E., Gächter, S.: Cooperation and punishment in public goods experiments. Am. Econ. Rev.
90, 980–994 (2000)
Fehr, E., Gächter, S.: Altruistic punishment in humans. Nature 415, 137–140 (2002)
Fischbacher, U., Gächter, S., Fehr, E.: Are people conditionally cooperative? Evidence from a
public goods experiment. Econ. Lett. 71, 397–404 (2001)
Fudenberg, D., Rand, D.G., Dreber, A.: Slow to anger and fast to forgive: cooperation in an
uncertain world. Am. Econ. Rev. 102, 720–749 (2012)
Gracia-Lázaro, C., et al.: Heterogeneous networks do not promote cooperation when humans play
a Prisoner’s Dilemma. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 109, 12922–12926 (2012)
Grujić, J., Eke, B., Cabrales, A., Cuesta, J.A., Sánchez, A.: Three is a crowd in iterated prisoner’s
dilemmas: experimental evidence on reciprocal behavior. Sci. Rep. 2, 638 (2012b)
Grujić, J., Fosco, C., Araujo, L., Cuesta, J.A., Sánchez, A.: Social experiments in the mesoscale:
humans playing a spatial prisoner’s dilemma. PLoS ONE 5, e13749 (2010)
Grujić, J., Röhl, T., Semmann, D., Milinski, M., Traulsen, A.: Consistent strategy updating in spa-
tial and non-spatial behavioral experiments does not promote cooperation in social networks.
PLoS ONE 7, e47718 (2012a)
Gunnthorsdottir, A., Houser, D., McCabe, K.: Disposition, history and contributions in public
goods experiments. J. Econ. Behav. Organ. 62, 304–315 (2007)
Gunnthorsdottir, A., Rapoport, A.: Embedding social dilemmas in intergroup competition reduces
free-riding. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 101, 184–199 (2006)
Hamburger, H.: N-person prisoner’s dilemma. J. Math. Sociol. 3, 27–48 (1973)
Hamilton, W.D.: The genetical evolution of social behaviour. J. Theor. Biol. 7, 17–52 (1964)
Heckathorn, D.D.: The dynamics and dilemmas of collective action. Am. Soc. Rev. 61, 250–277
(1996)
Herrmann, B., Thoni, C., Gachter, S.: Antisocial punishment across societies. Science 319, 1362–
1367 (2008)
Inzlicht, M., Schmeichel, B.J., Macrae, C.N.: Why self-control seems (but may not be) limited.
Trends Cogn. Sci. 18, 127–133 (2014)
Isaac, R.M., Walker, J.M., Williams, A.W.: Group size and the voluntary provision of public goods:
experimental evidence utilizing large groups. J. Public Econ. 54(1), 1–36 (1994)
Kahneman, D.: Thinking, fast and slow. New York, NY: Farrar, Straus and Giroux (2011)
Kimbrough, E.O., Vostroknutov, A.: Norms make preferences social. J. Eur. Econ. Assoc. 14,
608–638 (2016)
Kocher, M.G., Cherry, T., Kroll, S., Netzer, R.J., Sutter, M.: Conditional cooperation on three
continents. Econ. Lett. 101, 175–178 (2008)
Kvarven, A., et al.: The intuitive cooperation hypothesis revisited: a meta-analytic examination of
effect-size and between-study heterogeneity. J. Econ. Sci. Assoc. 6, 26–42 (2019)
Levine, E., Barasch, A., Rand, D.G., Berman, J.Z., Small, D.A.: Signaling emotion and reason in
cooperation. J. Exp. Psychol. Gen. 5, 702–719 (2018)
Li, J., Liu, X., Yin, X., Wang, G., Niu, X., Zhu, C.: Transcranial direct current stimulation altered
voluntary cooperative norms compliance under equal decision-making power. Front. Hum.
Neurosci. 12, 265 (2018)
Libet, B.: Mind Time: The Temporal Factor in Consciousness. Harvard University Press,
Cambridge (2009)
Madsen, E.A., et al.: Kinship and altruism: a cross-cultural experimental study. Br. J. Psychol. 98,
339–359 (2007)
Mieth, L., Buchner, A., Bell, R.: Moral labels increase cooperation and costly punishment in a
Prisoner’s Dilemma game with punishment option. Sci. Rep. 11, 10221 (2021)
Milinski, M., Semmann, D., Krambeck, H.J.: Reputation helps solve the ‘tragedy of the commons.’
Nature 415, 424–426 (2002)
24 V. Capraro

Motro, D., Kugler, T., Connolly, T.: Back to the basics: how feelings of anger affect cooperation.
Int. J. Conf. Manag. 27, 523–546 (2016)
Murnighan, J.K., Roth, A.E.: Expecting continued play in prisoner’s dilemma games: a test of
several models. J. Conflict Resolut. 27, 279–300 (1983)
Nowak, M.A.: Five rules for the evolution of cooperation. Science 314, 1560–1563 (2006)
Nowak, M.A., Sigmund, K.: Evolution of indirect reciprocity by image scoring. Nature 393,
573–577 (1998)
Ostrom, E., Walker, J., Gardner, R.: Covenants with and without a sword: self-governance is
possible. Am. Polit. Sci. Rev. 86, 404–417 (1992)
Ohtsuki, H., Hauert, C., Lieberman, E., Nowak, M.A.: A simple rule for the evolution of
cooperation on graphs and social networks. Nature 441, 502–505 (2006)
Perc, M., Jordan, J.J., Rand, D.G., Wang, Z., Boccaletti, S., Szolnoki, A.: Statistical physics of
human cooperation. Phys. Rep. 687, 1–51 (2017)
Pereda, M., Capraro, V., Sánchez, A.: Group size effects and critical mass in public goods games.
Sci. Rep. 9, 5503 (2019)
Peysakhovich, A., Nowak, M.A., Rand, D.G.: Humans display a “cooperative phenotype” that is
domain general and temporally stable. Nat. Commun. 5, 4939 (2014)
Pfeiffer, T., Tran, L., Krumme, C., Rand, D.G.: The value of reputation. J. R. Soc. Interface 9,
2791–2797 (2012)
Polman, E., Kim, S.H.: Effects of anger, disgust, and sadness on sharing with others. Pers. Soc.
Psychol. Bull. 39, 1683–1692 (2013)
Puurtinen, M., Mappes, T.: Between-group competition and human cooperation. Proc. Royal Soc.
B: Biol. Sci. 276, 355–360 (2009)
Rahman, A., Reato, D., Arlotti, M., Gasca, F., Datta, A., Parra, L.C., et al.: Cellular effects of acute
direct stimulation: somatic and synaptic terminal effects. J. Physiol. 591, 2563–2578 (2013)
Rand, D.G., Arbesman, S., Christakis, N.A.: Dynamic social networks promote cooperation in
experiments with humans. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 108, 19193–19198 (2011)
Rand, D.G., Dreber, A., Ellingsen, T., Fudenberg, D., Nowak, M.A.: Positive interactions promote
public cooperation. Science 325, 1272–1275 (2009)
Rand, D.G., Nowak, M.A., Fowler, J.H., Christakis, N.A.: Static network structure can stabilize
human cooperation. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 111, 17093–17098 (2014a)
Rand, D.G.: Cooperation, fast and slow: Meta-analytic evidence for a theory of social heuristics
and self-interested deliberation. Psychol. Sci. 27, 1192–1206 (2016)
Rand, D.G.: Intuition, deliberation, and cooperation: Further meta-analytic evidence from 91
experiments on pure cooperation (2019). https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_
id=3390018
Rand, D.G., Nowak, M.A.: Human cooperation. Trends Cogn. Sci. 17, 413–425 (2013)
Rand, D.G., et al.: Social heuristics shape intuitive cooperation. Nat. Commun. 5, 3677 (2014b)
Rapoport, A., Chammah, A.M.: Prisoner’s Dilemma: A Study in Conflict and Cooperation (Vol.
165). University of Michigan press, Ann Arbor (1965)
Richerson, P., et al.: Cultural group selection plays an essential role in explaining human
cooperation: a sketch of the evidence. Behav. Brain Sci. 39, 1–68 (2016)
Rockenbach, B., Milinski, M.: The efficient interaction of indirect reciprocity and costly
punishment. Nature 444, 718–723 (2006)
Roth, A.E., Murnighan, J.K.: Equilibrium behavior and repeated play of the prisoner’s dilemma.
J. Math. Psychol. 17, 189–198 (1978)
Seinen, I., Schram, A.: Social status and group norms: indirect reciprocity in a repeated helping
experiment. Eur. Econ. Rev. 50, 581–602 (2006)
Sommerfeld, R.D., Krambeck, H.J., Semmann, D., Milinski, M.: Gossip as an alternative for direct
observation in games of indirect reciprocity. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 104, 17435–17440 (2007)
 How to Promote Cooperation for the Well-Being 25

Soon, C.S., Brass, M., Heinze, H.J., Haynes, J.D.: Unconscious determinants of free decisions in
the human brain. Nat. Neurosci. 11, 543–545 (2008)
Suri, S., Watts, D.J.: Cooperation and contagion in web-based, networked public goods
experiments. PLoS ONE 6, e16836 (2011)
Tan, J.H., Bolle, F.: Team competition and the public goods game. Econ. Lett. 96, 133–139 (2007)
Tomasello, M., Carpenter, M., Call, J., Behne, T., Moll, H.: Understanding and sharing intentions:
the origins of cultural cognition. Behav. Brain Sci. 28, 675–691 (2005)
Traulsen, A., Nowak, M.A.: Evolution of cooperation by multilevel selection. Proc. Natl. Acad.
Sci. 103, 10952–10955 (2006)
Traulsen, A., Semmann, D., Sommerfeld, R.D., Krambeck, H.J., Milinski, M.: Human strategy
updating in evolutionary games. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 107, 2962–2966 (2010)
Wang, J., Suri, S., Watts, D.J.: Cooperation and assortativity with dynamic partner updating. Proc.
Natl. Acad. Sci. 109, 14363–14368 (2012)
Yamagishi, T.: The provision of a sanctioning system as a public good. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 51,
110–116 (1986)
Yang, W., et al.: Nonlinear effects of group size on collective action and resource outcomes. Proc.
Natl. Acad. Sci. 110, 10916–10921 (2013)
Yao, X., Darwen, P.J.: An experimental study of N-person iterated prisoner’s dilemma games.
Informatica 18, 435–450 (1994)
 Home Care 2041: Signals from the Future

M. del Gaudio1 , E. Fabbri2 , F. Fraboni3 , G. Frangioni4 , F. Masci5,6 , F. Millo3 ,

G. Miranda7 , M. Pistolesi8 , R. Randazzo9 , A. Rondi10 , A. Rosa11 ,
and A. Augusto10(B)
1 Inail UOT CVR, Avellino, Italy
2 Regional Agency for Health and Social Care, Emilia-Romagna Region, Bologna, Italy
3 Department of Psychology, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy
4 NOS ERGOMeyer, Meyer Children’s Hospital, Florence, Italy
5 Department of Health Sciences, University of Milan, Milan, Italy
6 Colorado State University Radiological Health Department, Fort Collins, CO, USA
7 KION Group, Antwerpen, Belgium
8 Laboratory of Ergonomics and Design (LED), Department of Architecture, University of
Florence, Florence, Italy
9 Clinical Psychologist, Catania, Italy
10 Sky Runner Srl, Bergamo, Italy
[email protected]
11 Proges Soc Coop, Parma, Italy

Abstract. Technological evolution has made available tools capable of connect-

ing the patient to treating doctors and health facilities for ordinary activities
and carrying out medical investigations directly at the patient’s home, thanks to
increasingly sophisticated devices.
The restrictions on the movement of people due to the COVID-19 pandemic
have encouraged the use of tools already available to doctors and patients but
have also accelerated the development of ongoing projects. The Italian Society
of Ergonomics and Human Factors SIE has created a multidisciplinary working
group that has tried to imagine the shape of home care in the next twenty years.
The study is based on integrating the “Human-Centered Design” and “Strategic
Foresight” processes. According to their skills, the eight researchers have tried
to identify the trends that will most influence the future, designing the possible
scenarios in which home care will take place.

Keywords: Ergonomics · Human factors · Human-Centered Design · Strategic

Foresight · Home care

1 Introduction
1.1 International Background
Traditionally, when we talk about “care” within the welfare system, we mainly refer
to the pursuit of reducing and/or eliminating the state of the malaise of a population
through the implementation of a complex system of services and interventions toward

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023

T. Bellandi et al. (Eds.): SIE 2022, SSDI 28, pp. 26–35, 2023.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-28390-1_3
 Home Care 2041: Signals from the Future 27

the people themselves. In recent decades, however, we witnessed a shift in focus towards
promoting healthy conditions rather than focusing exclusively on eradicating the causes
of illness.
This change of focus takes place in a global context in which we are witnessing the
development of various factors such as the change in demographic dynamics [1, 2] and
in the health care needs of the population with an increasing number of older adults
and/or people with chronic pathologies [3].
The experience of the restrictions resulting from the pandemic situation that society
has had to face makes it clear that the network of personal services needs to be reorganized
in order to strengthen the possibilities of territorial care. In this sense, technological
innovations (both in the health and non-health sectors) are fundamental for developing
a personal support and care network.
Therefore, we are dealing with “emerging technologies that cause disruptions to the
current operating models of governments and enable innovative solutions, both for public
policies and for the provision of goods and services, as well as for the socio-economic
context in general” [4].
Technological development has a substantial impact on both the social and economic
spheres, especially on health organization policies. The recent pandemic has favoured
the proliferation of new digital tools, implementing both the knowledge and the use of
them by health service operators and users in the various stages of treatment. We refer
to the development and diffusion of Telemedicine practices [5–7], defined according to
the guidelines of the World Health Organization as “the provision of care and assistance
services, in situations where distance is a critical factor, by any health worker through
the use of information and communication technologies for the exchange of information
useful for the diagnosis, treatment and prevention of disease and trauma, for research
and evaluation and for the continuous training of health personnel, in the interest of the
health of the individual and the community” [8].
This method of access to care, therefore, offers, as far as the users of the service are
concerned, the possibility of keeping their medical parameters under control by accessing
their online health records, thus allowing the constant monitoring of their state of health
and encouraging active participation in prevention and health implementation. On the
other hand, as far as the provision of health care by doctors and health care personnel
is concerned, this method offers the possibility of accessing more advanced equipment
that favours a multidisciplinary approach tailored to the individual characteristics of the
patient/user, from diagnosis to treatment and subsequent follow-up. However, it should
be specified that these services should not be regarded as a replacement for the doctor-
patient relationship but as an improvement and streamlining of that process. The risk,
in this sense, is a shift of focus from the person’s centrality to digital and technological
development.
It follows that it is necessary to bear in mind that when we talk about “care”, we are
mainly referring to a “care relationship” in which the main actors are the doctor and the
patient, who actively collaborate in the development of the psycho-physical wellbeing
of the subject in the totality of the elements that constitute and promote it. From this
point of view, it is essential to analyze the social, environmental, technological, political
and economic elements that determine the evolution of healthcare organizations. This
28 M. del Gaudio et al.

process aims to hypothesize the possible and future scenarios of the care services and
initiate beneficial choices and actions to implement and apply in the care process.
Therefore, the main objective of the research project is to create a transdisciplinary
synergy, from healthcare professionals to researchers and developers of new technolo-
gies, to anticipate the risks, possibilities, and impact of technological development in the
field of care. The overarching goal is to favour the cultural development towards inno-
vation, keeping the people at the center, and promote the development of technologies
capable of positively impacting the future of care.
In this paper, we describe the methodology used and the objectives achieved during
the research programme promoted by the Italian Society of Ergonomics and Human
Factors (SIE) and the World Usability Day (WUD), whose objective was the definition
of a preferred scenario for home care in the next 20 years, through the integration of
Human Centered Design and Strategic Foresight.

2 Material and Methods

2.1 Human-Centered Foresight Project

The Human Centered Foresight Project (HCFP) started between July and September
2021, with the establishment of the research team (8 experts on different drivers and two
experts in Human Factors and Ergonomics).
The researchers were selected among the Italian Society of Ergonomics and Human
Factors (SIE) members and external professionals in the field of home care. The requi-
sites for participating in the project were two: i) having work experience in the social,
economic, technological, environmental and political sectors as driving forces behind
all change; ii) having work experience in health and personal care.
The project aims to answer the question: How will technology change people’s home
care in the next twenty years?
With the aid of the researchers involved, the project aspires to question and lay the
foundations for a people-centered culture of innovation capable of driving the design of
technologies that will positively impact the future of home care.
The researchers developed a new methodological process, hybridizing “Human-
Centered Design” and “Strategic Foresight”, to codify it in an effective and efficient
methodological specification.
The project was developed through 7 workshops, each with the duration of eight
hours:

1. Future Literacy and Past Analysis: presentation of the Strategic Foresight method-
ology, key concepts, historical drivers and new forces for change;
2. Trend Analysis: Horizon Scanning phase, identification of current relevant trends,
counter-trends, weak signals and stability factors;
3. Cross-Impact Analysis & Scenarios Development: weighting the cross-impact of the
identified trends, counter-trends, weak signals and stability factors and development
of future scenarios considering the cross-impacts of trends, counter-trends, weak-
signals and stability factors;
 Home Care 2041: Signals from the Future 29

4. Objectives and Critical Factors: identification of 4 possible scenarios, identification

of the preferred scenario and the objectives to be achieved, development of a road
map using the “three horizons” method;
- WudSIE2022: involvement of experts;
5. Follow Up and Validation: revision of the scenario and road map based on the experts’
findings, identification of a defined scenario and road map as the output of the table;
6. Conclusion: examination of the concepts, comparison of possible new “inspirations”,
final validation of the results, fixing the modalities of production and communication
of the results (report).

The process included an intermediate step for checking the results elaborated in
the first half of the project. This was done during the WudSIE2021 event, presenting
the future scenario to 2041. In this phase, a team of 8 experts on the different drivers
(society, economics, technology, environment and politics) plus two experts in Human
Centered Design were added to support the project, who provided feedback regarding
the desirability and feasibility of the identified future scenario.
The experts’ feedback was used in the last two workshops for developing the final
scenarios as the conclusive output of the project.

3 Results

This section outlines the results of the HCFP process.

The first workshop focused on introducing the methodology to the project
researchers. A practical retrospective activity was carried out to analyze the histori-
cal drivers and forces of change over the past twenty years. The researchers were able to
familiarise themselves with the Strategic Foresight methodology, analyzing the events
that have shaped the world as we know it, namely the historical events that occurred in
the last twenty years and how they have changed the way we live. In this phase, the focus
was on society at large and not only the domain of home care.
The second workshop focused on the Horizon Scanning phase. The researchers car-
ried out individual investigations and analyses between the first and second workshops.
Elements that could impact the world of home care over the next twenty years were
identified. Results of individual investigations were then shared during the workshop
itself. The identified elements were systematized into a diagram to identify rising and
downwards trends (Table 1). The researchers identified potential counterforces for each
trend. In addition, researchers also identified “weak signals” (i.e. new ideas, issues, or
technologies that are currently “under the radar” but could develop into relevant drivers
of change) and “stability factors” (i.e. elements of the current society that will slow or
prevent changes).
The third workshop started with the so-called cross-impact analysis phase. Firstly, the
researchers reached an agreement on which elements collected in the Horizon Scanning
phase had to be included to build the preferred future scenarios. The researchers then
analyzed if and with what magnitude these factors could impact each other. The identified
trends, counter-trends, weak signals and stability factors were then entered into a matrix
table, and each crossing was assigned an impact value ranging between -3 and + 3. This
30 M. del Gaudio et al.

Table 1. Trends analysis: horizon scanning

Drivers of change Counter-trends

Rising trends BlockChain Bitcoin rejection (El Salvador,
Robotics and Exoskeletons China)
AI Rejection (fear) of workers / trade
New migratory flows unions
Energy: photovoltaic - wind - Taxation of robots
electricity Closing the borders
Smart home - Smart cities -5G Environmental movements - land
Health policies availability
New foods Absence of public incentives -
Search for solutions to climate deductions
change Vegans - vegetarians - slow food
Request for self-determination at the Denial of the climate problem
end of life Legal limits
Ageing EU push for regulations and bans
Gamification
Downward trends “Physical” Iteration - Appointments Physical iteration requests increase
in presence.“ Electricity cost increase
Energies: methane / LPG Limits to “rainbow” families
Traditional family Limits to access to means of
Use of cash payment
Physical stores Game stop
Landline phones
Quality/accessibility to water
Paper books

Table 2. Clusters resulting from the cross-impact analysis

Cluster 1 Cluster 2 Cluster 3 Cluster 4

Factors Gamification Religious/cultural Transhumanism Religious/cultural
included in Circular Economy extremism Circular Economy extremism
the cluster Smart Homes Poverty Intelligent Robotics Circular
Alternative Transport drones Alternative energies Economy
energies New pandemic New economics Intelligent
Environmental viruses concepts Robotics
policies New economics Alternative
concepts energies
New economics
concepts

analysis resulted in four clusters of factors. Each cluster composes a possible scenario to
be developed. Figure 1 illustrates the selected factors and the cross-impact weightings
assigned by the researchers, while Fig. 2 shows the resulting clusters.
 Home Care 2041: Signals from the Future 31

Fig. 1. Weightings of the Cross-impact Analysis

After the cross-impact analysis, the third workshop saw the development of possible
future scenarios. Each researcher was asked to choose one of the four clusters identified
in the third workshop. Then, based on the selected cluster, each researcher had to develop
a preferred scenario using a storytelling methodology. The developed scenario had to
show and clarify the interactions between the various cluster elements for each identified
driver. Simultaneously, a survey for experts was developed. The survey aimed to check
the result of the second and third workshops against the judgments of a pool of experts
belonging to the WUD group. The results of the qualitative questionnaire were later used
to complement the researchers’ work.
In the fourth workshop, the researchers selected one scenario according to two cri-
teria: highest preferability and presence of the highest number of trends analyzed in the
previous workshops. The selected scenario was labelled as the “Preferred Scenario”.
Then, on the basis of the “Preferable Scenario”, a set of requirements was identified
for the five drivers. On the basis of the requirements, the steps for the realization of
the scenario were identified, i.e., the objectives linked to the requirements and critical
factors for the achievement of each objective.
The WudSIE2021 event was the last step of the first phase of the research. As
mentioned in the method section, it helped gather feedback on the results and encouraged
a discussion about the identified objectives.
In the fifth workshop, a follow-up and validation of the researchers’ output were
conducted. In particular, the Preferable Scenario, its requirements, and critical factors
were adjusted according to the experts’ comments and feedback gathered through the
survey and during the WudSIE2022 event. This allowed progressing to another crucial
step of the project, the development of a road map for reaching the Preferable Scenario.
The roadmap consisted of a series of steps, distributed across the five drivers, that should
32 M. del Gaudio et al.

be achieved within the next 20 years to reach the Preferable Scenario. The roadmap was
considered the basis for the definition of the system architecture.
Finally, the last step involved the definition of the system architecture, which, during
the SIE Conference “Ergonomics and Nudging for Health, Safety and Happiness”, was
helpful in the working group of designers to graph the preferred scenario proposed by
the group of researchers.
Six system architectures were provided to the designers (see Fig. 3), divided in time:
Scenario 2024, Scenario 2026, Scenario 2029, Scenario 203, Scenario 2036 and Scenario
2041.
The realization of the objectives, identified with the letters T (technology), S (soci-
ety), A (environment), E (economics) and P (politics), allowed the researchers to define

Fig. 2. System architecture, scenario 2041

 Home Care 2041: Signals from the Future 33

time divisions. During the workshop phase, the researchers asked themselves two ques-
tions: i) How long does it take to realize each objective? ii) How do the objectives relate
to each other?
As shown in Fig. 2, the various time steps, and the various relationships between
objectives, allow for the definition of a complete and accurate short- and long-term
preferred scenario.

4 Discussion

Starting from the “Strategic Foresight” methodology, the global changes of the last
20 years were analyzed concerning the topic of investigation: technological progress,
innovative ideas and values, behaviours and expectations, previously unpredictable
changes, identifying the “historical” drivers that led to the current situation and identi-
fying the “historical” drivers that are still current. Then we identified the new “forces”
of change (e.g., new technologies, new potential policies, new ideas or concepts, etc.),
considering the social, technological, economic, environmental, political context. In the
so-called “Horizon Scanning”, we analyzed trends and counter-trends, hypothesizing
their present and future impact and outlining the basis of the Preferable Scenario.
The process has allowed us to assume that, in order for the technological implemen-
tation to maintain people at the centre of the care system, understood as a bio-psycho-
social system [9], it is necessary that, as of now, inter-professionalism, both health and
technological, initiate solid and constant collaborations. In order for this to happen,
it is necessary to initiate changes in organizational paradigms of social and economic
policies. This implies a greater awareness of the influence that the areas analyzed can
develop reciprocally. If, on the one hand, the political and economic class needs to initiate
concrete organizational choices of wide-ranging development and actions to consolidate
what already exists, on the other hand, it is necessary to implement new health and social
culture among users and operators in the sector by developing training and information
activities on all the aspects inherent to the implementation of the research project.
At the same time, it is necessary to develop innovative technologies that are easy, both
economically and technically, accessible to the target group and specialists. Fostering
greater awareness of the circularity of events, the so-called One Health, is based on
recognizing that human health, animal health, and the ecosystem’s health are inextricably
linked.
The holistic One Health vision [10], i.e., a health model integrating different disci-
plines, is ancient and current. It is an ideal approach to achieving global health because
it addresses the needs of the most vulnerable populations based on the intimate relation-
ship between their health, the health of their animals and the environment in which they
live, considering the broad spectrum of determinants that emerges from this relation-
ship. The Italian Ministry of Health officially recognizes it, the European Commission,
and all international organizations as a relevant strategy in all areas that benefit from
collaboration between disciplines (doctors, environmentalists, economists, sociologists,
etc.).
34 M. del Gaudio et al.

5 Conclusions

The construction of future scenarios on the theme of home care is of broad interest
also outside the health sector. It is linked to various aspects and categories of products
and services, from the furnishing of the home, where data collection and monitoring
technologies will have to be integrated, to the professionalism of health workers to be
developed to bring the most appropriate skills into the home.
At the same time, transport and communication systems will also have to be aligned
with the new modes of interaction. This requires the construction of comprehensive,
accurate, feasible and desirable future scenarios using Strategic Foresight and Human
Centered Design methodologies, which can be the basis for political and economic
decision-making processes. As a result, companies can implement strategies in the short
term and be ready for the envisaged future by providing services and products adapted
to society’s future needs and requirements.
The boundaries drawn by humans on maps lose their meaning in the face of modern
global challenges posed by climate, health, and an increasingly interconnected world.
Considering ourselves as extraneous elements of the ecosystem has meant that we sig-
nificantly alter 75% of the earth’s surface and 66% of the seas and oceans, often without
respecting their balance [11]. We are elements of a single system, in which the health
of each human, animal or environmental element is closely interdependent with that
of the others: this is the heart of the One Health approach, which promotes integrated
management in the field of public health, and which must become the overall vision to
be developed at all levels of decision-making.
It is also necessary to renew education and training courses, which primarily oper-
ate in watertight compartments and have little dialogue, limiting the development of a
circular culture where the “contamination” of skills becomes increasingly important.
Understanding how much the health of living beings on the planet increasingly
requires an integrated approach is enough to observe the decrease in emissions in China
and Italy, a direct consequence of the restriction on the free movement made in the two
countries for the Coronavirus. Integration, the sharing of programmes, organizations,
training and technologies, may be the only way forward so that there are no winners or
losers, but only a more balanced ecosystem, capable of conserving valuable resources,
with a greater capacity for social, political, health and economic inclusion, and able to
provide adequate responses to the present and future needs of the population.
Finally, the added value of this research project is the involvement of companies
and professionals already working in specific fields and who are developing innovative
systems and solutions not yet available to the public or limited to small contexts but which
is a desirable and not so distant future will become easily accessible and widespread.

Acknowledgements. We would like to thank the Italian Society of Ergonomics and Human
Factors (SIE) and the various partners and professionals who took part in this research programme.
We would like to thank Dr. A. Augusto for coordinating the study using the Strategic Foresight
method and Dr. S. Gilotta, Dr. A. Rondi and Dr. F. Masci for their scientific support.
 Home Care 2041: Signals from the Future 35

References
1. World Health Organization: activate ageing, a policy framework. World Health Organization.
Geneva (2002). https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/67215/WHO_NMH_NPH_
02.8.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y
2. United nations, department of economic and social affairs, population division: world
population prospects 2019: highlights. United Nations, New York (2019)
3. OECD: Health at a Glance: OECD Indicators 2005. OECD Publishing, Paris (2005)
4. Le Fevre, E.M.: Le tecnologie emergenti a servizio dei diritti fondamentali dell’uomo. La
Rivista delle politiche sociali, n.1 2020 January/March, 193–202 (2020)
5. Ekeland, A.G., Bowes, A., Flottorp, S.: Effectiveness of telemedicine: a systematic review
of reviews. Int. J. Med. Inform. 79(11), 736–771 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmedinf.
2010.08.006
6. Ministero della Salute Italia: Telemedicina - Linee di indirizzo nazionali (2012). https://www.
salute.gov.it/portale/documentazione/p6_2_2_1.jsp?id=2129
7. Waller, M., Stotler, C.: Telemedicine: a primer. Curr. Allergy Asthma Rep. 18(10), 1–9 (2018).
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11882-018-0808-4
8. World Health Organization: a health telematics policy in support of WHO’s health-for-all
strategy for global health development: report of the WHO group consultation on health
telematics. World Health Organization, Geneva (1997). https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/
handle/10665/63857/WHO_DGO_98.1.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y
9. Engel, G.L.: The need for a new medical model: a challenge for biomedicine. Science
196(4286), 129–136 (1977)
10. Istituto Superiore di Sanità, One Health, www.iss.it/one-health. Accessed 05 Mar 2022
11. IPBES: Summary for policymakers of the global assessment report on biodiversity and ecosys-
tem services of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosys-
tem Services. IPBES secretariat, Bonn, (2019). https://ipbes.net/sites/default/files/inline/files/
ipbes_global_assessment_report_summary_for_policymakers.pdf
 Use of Digital Devices to Assess Vaccine
Hesitancy and Promote Pertussis Vaccination
Among Pregnant Women

Dario Menicagli1(B) , Guglielmo Arzilli2 , Elena Lucaccini3 , Giuditta Scardina2 ,

Daniele Sironi2 , Lara Tavoschi2 , and Pierluigi Lopalco4
1 IMT School for Advanced Studies Lucca, 55100 Lucca, Italy
[email protected]
2 Department of Translational Research and New Technologies in Medicine and Surgery,
University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy
3 University Hospital of Pisa, Pisa, Italy
4 Department of Biological and Environmental Sciences and Technology, University of Salento,

Lecce, Italy

Abstract. The pertussis vaccination in pregnancy represents the main preventive

strategy against this disease in the first trimester of life. The purpose of the study is
to develop an e-health tool for assessing vaccination attitudes and to evaluate three
types of communication for pregnant women, providing efficient information for
their vaccination choice. One-hundred-and-five participants were assessed using a
psychometric questionnaire implemented on a tablet and subsequently, they were
exposed to different communication formats based on the Elaboration Likelihood
Model (ELM). The participants in each group receive the same information con-
tents on vaccination and pertussis in a different format (two provided by digital
devices and one by leaflet). The difference between the post-intervention scores
on vaccination intention showed that a video containing an expert-patient conver-
sation was equivalent to the information provided by a collaborator delivering the
leaflet and these two formats were significantly more efficient compared to the
information provided through interactive infographics. These results demonstrate
the importance of interpersonal exchange as a key factor also in the e-health tool
to provide persuasive health information.

Keywords: Pregnancy · Pertussis · Vaccine · E-health · Communication

1 Introduction
Pertussis is a highly contagious infectious disease of bacterial origin caused by Bordetella
pertussis. The disease affects all ages, in particular, children: in 2018, there were 35627
cases of pertussis reported from 30 EU/EEA countries. Individuals under fifteen years
of age accounted for 62% of all reported cases. Children under one year of age were the
most affected age group, with the highest rate of 44.4 cases per 100,000 inhabitants [1].
The disease is widespread worldwide with an endemic pattern and epidemic outbreaks

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023

T. Bellandi et al. (Eds.): SIE 2022, SSDI 28, pp. 36–44, 2023.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-28390-1_4
 Use of Digital Devices to Assess Vaccine Hesitancy 37

occur every three to five years with summer-autumn seasonality. Clinically, the course
of the disease is either paucisymptomatic or requires hospitalization with respiratory
complications. Pertussis typically occurs as a primary infection in unvaccinated children,
more rarely in vaccinated children and adults.
Vaccination offers an effective opportunity to prevent the disease, particularly in
children. In 1974, the anti-pertussis vaccination was included in the Expanded Program
on Immunization (EPI) established by the World Health Organization (WHO) [2]. The
available scientific evidence indicates that vaccination of this category of young subjects
is safe and effective in achieving protection, despite this decrease in effectiveness in
subsequent months [3]. Although this approach is successful, vaccination of newborns
cannot induce complete protection in the very early stages of life, when children are very
vulnerable. To address this problem, the prevention of the disease in the first few months
of life was made with two approaches: cocoon strategy and maternal immunization.
The former concerns the protection of the infant by vaccinating the mother in the post-
partum period and family contacts as potential sources of infection, while the latter
regards the vaccination from the 3rd trimester of gestation regardless of the woman’s
previous vaccination status and to be repeated at each subsequent pregnancy.
The most easily pursued strategy is vaccination during pregnancy, which is the most
effective in protecting infants during the first weeks of life [4, 5]. Vaccination acceptance
is the result of a complex decision-making process that is influenced by a wide range of
factors. It is therefore essential to provide pregnant women with specific education and
information on the need for vaccination coverage. Interventions in this area thus make
it possible to clarify what are the possible confounding factors that influence individual
choice, distorting the beliefs that the individual holds about the risks and benefits of a
given disease condition and health interventions [6].
In line with such a vision, we pioneered an innovative communication path to increase
adherence to pertussis vaccination during pregnancy. The proposed approach included
the e-health methodology, combining the intervention and the assessment phase of indi-
vidual attitudinal variables related to vaccination. The study of communication and
decision-making processes in psychology and behavioral economics clarified the possi-
ble frameworks provided to individuals to guide their choice, especially in a particular
context such as vaccination during pregnancy [7]. The use of electronic devices within
the outpatient setting allowed both to assess of a specific population on their attitude
towards the prevention strategies and to create specific communication features to raise
awareness and facilitate decision-making on health issues.
The theory we adopted to guide interventions in vaccination education and effective
communication is the Elaboration Likelihood Model (ELM) [8]. This model describes
two different ways of processing information, denominated peripheral and central routes.
These two paths differ in the way they convey the message and distinguish individuals
based on the effort they used to employ to process the information provided to them.
Individuals highly motivated to process the message follow the central route of persua-
sion, while those who have a low level of motivation tend to process the message by the
peripheral route. Mirroring the difference between these two paths, the strength of the
arguments and contents characterize the central route requires a receiver that actively
analyzes, and deeply reflects on the information presented, leading to a strong and lasting
38 D. Menicagli et al.

persuasion. The peripheral route, on the other hand, is characterized by a low level of
re-elaboration by the receiver, and a greater focus on the superficial and formal aspects
of the message, without critical analysis and cognitive engagement, resulting in a low
level of information. The persuasion achieved by the peripheral route is unstable and not
lasting. The choice of whether to use one or the other channel depends on the receiver’s
basal cognitive capacity, need for cognition, and how long the sender wants the message
to last.
Despite the ELM, being a theory of persuasion, the central route could be exploited
to boost individual behavior by appealing to their rational analysis of the problem, while
the peripheral route could be influenced by an approximation of the information or by
emotional and social components implied in the decision, resembling other classical
dual-model explaining decision-making processes [9].
These dual representations of the decision coincide when they are applied in the
design of web or digital tools to foster individual behavior with a persuasive or nudging
effect [10, 11].
Our study aims to design an experimental model for evaluating the effectiveness of
innovative communication approaches to increase adherence to pertussis vaccination in
pregnancy. The use of e-health methodology combines the intervention phase and the
evaluation phase of individual attitudinal variables related to vaccination.

2 Methods

2.1 Setting and Study Design

This study was conducted in a single-blinded, parallel-group, quasi-experimental form

involving a sample of pregnant women recruited in the waiting room of four different
gynecological clinics in Tuscany, Italy. The study was conducted from March 2019 to
February 2020. Participants enrolled were over 18 years old and had a sufficient level
of literacy to self-complete a questionnaire in Italian. We obtained informed consent
from all respondents and ethical approval of the study from the Ethics Committee of the
North-West Regional Health Department of Tuscany.

2.2 Measures and Interventions

Each of the three interventions was divided into three different phases: participants were
initially assessed with a tablet using a battery of 5-point Likert scales (from 1 - strongly
disagree to 5 - strongly agree) evaluating individual levels of Vaccine Hesitancy, Risk
Perception, Subjective Norms and Self-Efficacy. We used the questionnaire proposed by
Shapiro et al. for this assessment [12]. After the initial evaluation, participants of each
clinic were assigned into three groups based on different communication formats based
on the Elaboration Likelihood Model (ELM) theory8 . Each of the three communica-
tive ways was equivalent in terms of the content provided (information about pertussis
vaccination during pregnancy) but differed in the presented modalities, resulting in a
different elaboration of the topic and a different decision-making process adopted by
the participants. We considered three groups: "Peripheral-route" intervention (P), which
 Use of Digital Devices to Assess Vaccine Hesitancy 39

consists of displaying a single video representing a conversation between physician and

patient; "Central-route" intervention (C), in which participants actively selected a series
of short videos according to the information they found most interesting. These videos
reported question-answer infographics on vaccination topics. The tablet previously used
to administer the initial assessment provided both these communication formats. The
last group represents the “Control group” (V), in which a standard paper leaflet about
vaccination was given to the participant by the investigating physician or health care
provider as a collaborator. In the post-intervention phase, the respondents were asked
via the same digital tool about their intention to vaccinate. Figures 1, 2, and 3 give an
example of each of the proposed interventions.

Fig. 1. Display a frame of the video that represents the peripheral intervention.

Fig. 2. Reported an example of the short video representing the central intervention.

2.3 Data Collection

The pre-and post-intervention responses were stored offline and then transferred to a
password-protected cloud system. The personal data identifying the enrolled subjects
were collected and stored on paper forms together with the documentation of informed
consent and authorization to process the data. Each questionnaire was marked with an
identification code, which made it possible to check the participant’s vaccination status
from the regional vaccination register at the end of the study.
40 D. Menicagli et al.

Fig. 3. Shows the Vaccine Leaflet used in the control group intervention.

2.4 Statistical Analysis

Statistical analysis was performed with SPSS 20 software. Descriptive analysis was
carried out in the global sample and separated different treatment groups. An equality
test for each self-reported scale was performed to analyze possible group discrepancies
in the initial individual evaluation.
To analyze the effect of treatment on mothers’ attitudes toward vaccinating, we car-
ried out a linear multiple regression setting the mean score of Vaccination Intention
measured after interventions as a dependent variable and treatment type as a categori-
cal fixed factor. Self-Efficacy, Vaccination Hesitancy, Risk Perception, and Subjective
Norms scale mean scores were included as independent variables.
Finally, we analyze the vaccination rate after one year with a two-way contingency
table with the Vaccination Rate and Treatment types as variables. A chi-square test was
performed to investigate the significant difference between treatments.

3 Results

3.1 Descriptive Analysis

We included in the study a sample of 105 pregnant women. The participants were equally
assigned to each type of intervention. The mean age of all participants was 33 (IQR 29–
36 years; SD = 5.573). Vaccine Hesitancy, Risk Perception, Subjective Norms, and Self
Efficacy scales showed good reliability with alpha di Cronbach > 0.70. We observed
that participants had a low vaccine hesitancy (mean VA = 4.374; SD = 0.588). The Risk
Perception scale, as well as the Self-Efficacy and Subjective Norms assessment indexes,
were evaluated in the whole sample (mean RP = 2.786; SD = 1.09; mean SN = 2.7;
SD = 1.44, mean SE = 3.471; SD = 1.030).
 Use of Digital Devices to Assess Vaccine Hesitancy 41

The equality test between treatment groups showed a significant difference in Self-
Efficacy and Vaccination Hesitancy between groups. Peripheral-route group was sig-
nificantly lower in Vaccine Hesitancy, while the Central-route group was significantly
different compared to the other two groups (Table 1).

Table 1. Shows assessment scales mean and standard deviation in treatment groups

3.2 Intervention Effect on Intention to Vaccinate and Vaccination Behavior

Linear regression on intention to vaccinate was significant across groups F(6, 98)= 6.407,
p < 0.001) (Table 2). Vaccine Hesitancy score showed a significant impact on intention
(β = 0.4, t = 2.02, p < 0.046), showing as expected that a higher measure corresponds
to a positive attitude to vaccination, while the significant role of Risk Perception (β =
-0.29, t = -2.74, p < 0.007) indicated the negative effect of perceived harmfulness of
the vaccines. Subjective Norms did not have any role in the mothers’ intention (p = ns),
while Self-Efficacy could be of marginal importance (p = 0.05). The treatment effect
measured by the Intervention to Vaccinate scale was significant in the peripheral (t =
3.290, p < 0.001) and vaccine leaflet (t = 2.932, p < 0.004) conditions compared to the
central route of communication.
The Contingency Table does not show any difference between communication condi-
tions in the following vaccination rate reported by regional administrative data, χ2 (2,105)
= 2.143, p = 0.343 (Table 3).
42 D. Menicagli et al.

Table 2. Reported model summary - Post-intervention intention and Linear Regression treatment
effects on Post-intervention Intention. Predictors refer to the mean score for scales and treat-
ment difference compared to central-route intervention (C) that represents the reference level,
Vaccination Leaflet (V), and peripheral-route (P).

Table 3. Shows Contingency Tables related to vaccination rate after one year from the interven-
tion.

Intervention
Vaccination C P V Total
No 16 18 22 56
Yes 19 17 13 49
Total 35 35 35 105

4 Discussion
The use of digital methodologies and tools consent simultaneous assessment and inter-
vention in the promotion of healthy behavior. E-health approaches need an accurate
design that defines the experience of the health professional and the patient in their use,
facilitating evaluation and communication procedures for health purposes [13]. This
study aimed to develop innovative communication approaches to increase adherence to
pertussis vaccination in pregnancy. The results showed that there was good heterogeneity
in the sample regarding the variables analyzed. Vaccination hesitancy, self-efficacy, risk
perception, and the impact of subjective norms on mothers’ decisions showed a good dis-
tribution through the interventions performed. We showed how these factors influenced
post-intervention vaccination intention and related vaccination. If self-efficacy did not
Random documents with unrelated
content Scribd suggests to you:
lamplight revealed him to Kinky. The scoundrel flung back with a
wild yell.
Matt waited for no more. With a pounding heart he scrambled over
boxes and casks and stove wood on his way toward the other hatch.
A confused babel of voices reached him from the cabin; feet could
be heard running over the floor, and some one raised a great clatter
dropping into the hold.
"Come out here!" shouted a fierce voice. "Come out, I say, or I'll
shoot!"
Matt was willing to run the risk of stopping a bullet, there in the
darkness, and he was in altogether too big a hurry to throw up a
barricade between him and the man with the gun.
Rising on his knees, he lifted his hands to the hatch. No shot was
heard, and Matt reflected that the scoundrels would not dare fire a
revolver for fear of attracting attention from the other house boats in
the cove.
To throw back the hatch took only an instant, but, as the young
motorist scrambled through the opening, he was seized by the
shoulders and hurled roughly to the deck.
He was up again almost as soon as he was down.
"Landers!" bellowed a gruff voice; "where the deuce is Landers?
Take him, Kinky. I guess the two of us are enough without Landers.
I'll head him off on this side."
Matt felt a pair of arms go around him from behind. With a fierce
effort, however, he twisted clear of the clutching hands, whirled and
struck out with his fist.
An exclamation, more forcible than polite, was jolted out of Kinky.
"Hang it!" the scoundrel added, "he's got a fist like a pile driver. Lay
for him, Ross! I'm wabbling."
Before Motor Matt could turn and defend himself against Ross, Red-
whiskers bolted through the open cabin door.
"Don't make so much noise, you fellows!" he called angrily. "Every
house boat in the cove will be——"
Then he saw Matt. The latter had sprung to the edge of the deck
with the plain intention of diving overboard.
Before he could carry out his plan Ross and the leader of the three
men had him by each arm and had jerked him roughly back.
Matt struggled with all his power, but there were three against him,
and he was thrown to the deck and dragged into the cabin, one of
the men holding a hand over his mouth to prevent outcry.
The cabin was divided into two rooms, and Matt was half dragged
and half carried through the darkness of the first room into the
glaring lamplight of the one beyond.
"Put him in that chair over there," ordered the red-whiskered man.
"You needn't be afraid he'll yell, Kinky," he added, with savage
menace, "so take your hands from his mouth. If he lets out a
whoop, or tries to bolt, I'll fire, even if the noise brings a tender from
every house boat in the bay."
One look into the gleaming eyes of Red-whiskers was enough to
warn Matt that discretion demanded passive compliance with the
wishes of his captors.
Kinky removed his hands from Matt's lips, and Ross released his
arms. Both men stepped to one side, glaring at him curiously and
vindictively.
Red-whiskers, a revolver lying on his knees, was sitting on the
cushioned bench, directly facing Matt. With a steady hand he was
lighting a fresh cigar.
"Pull the window shades, Kinky," said he calmly. "Ross, lock both
doors and put the keys in your pocket. We'll have a little heart-to-
heart talk with Motor Matt, and I don't want Landers to see what we
do, or hear what we're talking about."
Motor Matt, blaming himself for what had happened, sat quietly and
wondered what was to come.
 CHAPTER XI.
SURPRISING EVENTS.
"You're a daring youngster," remarked Red-whiskers, leering at the
prisoner through the smoke of his cigar. "I suppose you think you're
pretty smart, eh? Well, there are others. How did you find out we
were here?"
"I found out," said Matt. "I don't think it would help me any if I told
you how."
"Don't get gay," admonished Red-whiskers, his eyes dropping
significantly to the weapon on his knee. "Remember where you are,
Motor Matt. You're interfering with a game that doesn't concern you
in the least. Poor policy, boy, poor policy. You ought to have sense
enough to know that without being told. Where did you meet young
Lorry?"
"I'm not talking about Lorry or any one else," returned Matt. "You
might as well let me go."
"All in due time, my lad, and after you satisfy our curiosity. You
rowed over from Tiburon?"
Matt was silent.
"That's what he must have done," spoke up Ross. "How could he
have got here if he hadn't rowed over? He didn't swim, that's sure,
for he's got on all his clothes an' they're dry as a bone. I'll go out
and see if I can discover his boat."
Ross turned to the door, but Red-whiskers lifted a restraining hand.
"We'll look after the boat in due time, Ross," said he. "Just now we'll
give all our attention to Motor Matt. I'll trouble you for that trunk
check, my lad," he finished, facing the prisoner once more.
Matt, knowing it would be worse than useless to resist, drew the
check from his pocket and tossed it to Red-whiskers.
"Much obliged," said the leader grimly, examining the tag. "This is
the one, sure enough," he added to Kinky and Ross.
"How did you know I had it?" asked Matt.
"The gent that raffled off that boat put me next. How much
pleasanter it would have been," Red-whiskers pursued, slipping the
check into his pocket, "if you'd been nice and sociable, over there at
the foot of Clay Street, and let me have that brass tag without trying
to make trouble. What have you gained, Motor Matt, by roughing
things up like you did? And what have you gained by sneaking in
here? Are you any better off?"
"Cut it out, John," growled Kinky. "What's the good o' readin' him a
lecture?"
Red-whiskers scowled at Kinky.
"Be so good as to dry up," he requested. "You never was able to see
anything an inch or two beyond your nose, so you can't guess what
I'm driving at. Motor Matt," he went on, to the prisoner, "what did
you lug that cop along with you for, when you came to the foot of
Clay Street? What was your object? Was you afraid of that part o'
town, and was he just a sort of bodyguard?"
Matt laughed at that.
"Hardly that," said he. "You've got ten thousand dollars that belongs
to young Lorry, and the policeman was there to get it."
"Well, well!" exclaimed the red-whiskered man, with a humorous
glance at Ross and Kinky, "he thinks we've got ten thousand dollars!
But," he continued, "assuming that we have got that much money,
how do you figure that it belongs to Lorry? Did Lorry steal it from his
old man? If he did, does that make it his? If it does, Motor Matt,
then if we stole the money from young Lorry it ought to belong to
us."
"That's foolish," said Matt, trying to guess what Red-whiskers was
driving at.
"Possibly it is. Now, you're a pretty good sort of fellow, only a trifle
headstrong, and I don't mind saying that we did take that ten
thousand from young Lorry. And why? Let me tell you it was all
perfectly legitimate." He leaned over confidentially and tapped Matt
on the knee with the muzzle of the revolver. "We're detectives, Motor
Matt, Chicago detectives, and old Mr. Lorry, that lives in Madison,
Wisconsin, commissioned us to recover that money. We've recovered
it; and you"—Red-whiskers leaned back and laughed softly
—"thought we was thieves and tried to have us pinched! What do
you think of that for a joke?"
"Then," said Matt, "it's all a joke about you and your pals sailing for
Honolulu to-morrow and dividing the money between you when you
get there?"
Enjoyment immediately faded out of the situation for the red-
whiskered man. He straightened up, pulled at his fiery beard and
glared at Motor Matt.
Matt realized that he had made a mistake. By speaking as he had
done, he had virtually admitted that he knew more about the plans
of the three rascals than they had thought possible.
"Ah," and a crafty smile crossed Red-whiskers' face "I thought you'd
let out something, if I prodded you a little, but I'll be hanged if I
expected that. This is beginning to look mighty serious for you,
Motor Matt. Where did you learn all that?"
"I was under the floor," replied Matt.
"Exactly—under the floor listening to a conversation that didn't
concern you. Because of that, you're going to stay two weeks on this
boat, and Landers is going to keep you. By then we'll be where
we're going and out of harm's way, and it won't be possible for what
you know to have any effect. You've only yourself to blame for this.
Who's that chink that won the boat in the raffle?"
"I don't know much about him," replied Matt.
"You took his boat across the bay for him, didn't you?"
"Yes."
"Well, he knew where you had gone, because he told me. That's
how I was able to send that note to the Bixler House. The chink said
you had a couple of fellows with you—one, in particular, who had
fallen off a ferryboat and whom you had picked up. Was that young
Lorry?"
"I'm not saying a word," said Matt, "about Lorry. You say you're
going to keep me on this house boat for two weeks. If that's your
plan, all right, go ahead with it."
For several minutes Matt, from where he sat, had been trying to
locate the satchel under the bench. It was impossible for him to see
it, and he supposed that it had either been moved by Red-whiskers,
or taken away.
"We're going to leave for parts unknown," continued the leader of
the three rogues, "and we're going to take young Lorry with us. I
guess if we give him a thousand of his father's money he'll be
satisfied."
"You're a scoundrel, on your own showing," cried Matt angrily, "but I
don't think you'd be such a contemptible scoundrel as to take that
boy away and make him a thief, like you and your pals!"
"Softly, Motor Matt," warned Red-whiskers. "What is the boy now but
a thief, and on his own showing, at that? I don't think we can hurt
him any, and by taking him away we'll be doing a good thing for him
—and for us."
"You'll ruin him, that's what you'll do," proceeded Matt indignantly.
"Haven't you a thought for his people, back there in Wisconsin?"
"What are his people to us? I had intended all along to compromise
with the cub and give him a thousand, but you got to him before we
did. He doesn't dare appeal to the law——"
"There are others who will act for him," broke in Matt. "There's the
making of a man in young Lorry, and if you do as you say you intend
to, you will end by making him no better than you are."
"You're not very complimentary, it strikes me," said Red-whiskers
easily, bending down and groping under the bench with one hand.
"We might just as well take our boodle and get away from here. I
had planned to stay on the house boat all night, and run over to
'Frisco in the launch in time to catch that steamer to-morrow, but
you've compelled us to change our plans. We'll take a night train,
and—— Where in blazes is that satchel?"
Failing to find the satchel with one hand, Red-whiskers had used
both hands. Even then the treasure grip eluded him, and in a
sudden flurry he dropped to the floor on his knees and looked under
the bench. The next instant he had leaped up, maddened and
furious.
"It's gone!" he shouted.
Kinky and Ross jumped as though they had been touched by a live
wire.
"Gone?" they echoed blankly.
"You know something about this!" cried Red-whiskers, facing Ross
furiously.
"What're you givin' us?" retorted Ross menacingly. "If you think you
can throw any such bluff as that, John, and make it stick, you've got
another guess coming. You've taken the satchel yourself! You never
intended to whack up with Kinky and me, and this is a move to
corral all the money."
"Don't be a fool!" snapped Red-whiskers, studying Ross' face for a
moment, and then swerving his eyes to Kinky.
The affair had a dark look, for a space, as both Kinky and Ross had
reached their hands under their coats. If the three scoundrels had a
quarrel among themselves, Matt felt that he would have a chance of
escape. His eager eyes traveled to the doors, and then to the
window.
"Look here, you two," went on Red-whiskers, his eyes glittering
fiendishly, "the satchel's gone. I'll take back what I said about you
two having had anything to do with trying to lift it. Certainly I didn't
—you ought to know that. We've all been in this room——"
"Except when we ran aft to ketch that fellow," fumed Ross,
indicating Matt with a jerk of the head. "You was in here alone with
the satchel then, John. How do we know you didn't hide it on us?"
"Mebby it was him!" stormed Kinky, stepping toward Matt.
"How could it have been him?" objected Ross. "He was under the
floor, and we kept him busy every minute until he bobbed up
through the after hatch."
"Then it was Landers!" cried Kinky. "I never did like that feller's
looks. I'll bet it was Landers! If——"
Just at that moment the chug-chug of a motor was heard outside.
"He's turning over the engine!" cried Red-whiskers, jumping for one
of the doors. "Landers has got the satchel and he's getting away
with it in the boat."
Red-whiskers threw himself against the door, trying to break it down.
"Wait, confound it!" yelped Ross; "here's the key, John. I'll unlock
the door if you'll gi' me a chance."
The three men paid no attention whatever to Matt. As soon as Ross
could unlock and throw open the door they all rushed out.
The San Bruno was still lying where she had been moored, but the
wheeze of a boat could be heard, and a craft, a cable's length away,
could be seen vanishing wraithlike into the shadows across the cove.
"Landers has got another boat, somewhere, and he's running away
in it!" declared Kinky.
"We'll overhaul him with the San Bruno," cried Red-whiskers,
throwing himself into the launch. "One of you stay behind and look
after the prisoner——"
"Hang the prisoner!" answered Kinky. "The money means more to us
than he does."
Ross cast off the rope that held the launch alongside the house boat,
and both he and Kinky sprang aboard the San Bruno.
Matt, bewildered by the surprising events that had followed each
other so swiftly, stood on the forward deck of the houseboat and
watched while the San Bruno got under way and started on the track
of the other boat.
That other boat, of course, Matt knew to be the Sprite. But why was
she tearing off across the cove like that? Why were McGlory and
Ping leaving Matt when they must have known he was in difficulties?
Had they started for Tiburon to get a few policemen and bring them
back to help their comrade out of his trouble?
As these questions sped through Matt's bewildered mind a laugh
echoed behind him—and he turned to face the most surprising of all
the events that had happened that night.
 CHAPTER XII.
M'GLORY'S RUN OF LUCK.
Joe McGlory, judging from the way fortune had turned her back on
him during his whole life, was positive that he had not been born
"under a lucky star." It was more likely, he thought, that he had
been born under the Dipper, and that the Dipper was upside down at
the time. Yet, be that as it might, luck had never had much to do
with McGlory. Whatever he got came to him always by hard knocks
and persistent grubbing. But there was a bright lining to the cloud,
and this lining was making ready to show itself.
He sat impatiently on the stern thwarts of the Sprite, while Matt was
doing his reconnoitring on the house boat, waiting impatiently for
him to return and report. Ping was forward at the steering wheel of
the launch, feeling casually and with a certain amount of awe of
every lever that manipulated the motor and the gear.
The little Sprite was completely dwarfed by the larger boat alongside
of which she cuddled, like a young duck under the lee of its mother,
and the gloom of the higher bulwarks overshadowed McGlory and
Ping.
From time to time, the cowboy stood up and looked across the
cockpit of the San Bruno toward the house boat. He saw Matt's head
silhouetted in the light from the cabin window, and finally he saw
him move away and vanish from sight behind the raised forward
deck of the larger motor boat.
After that, McGlory champed the bit, and waited. As is usual in such
cases, the seconds dragged like minutes, and the minutes were like
hours. The cowboy finally made up his mind that something had
gone wrong, and that he ought to investigate.
This feeling grew upon him until he could stand it no longer.
Creeping forward to where Ping was caressing the steering wheel,
he paused beside him for a moment.
"Motor Matt's been gone so long, Ping," said he, in a low tone, "that
I'm afraid he has struck on a snag. If that's so, it's up to me to flock
over to the house boat and do my little best to get him out of
trouble. Savvy?"
"Heap savvy," replied Ping. "By Klismus, China boy go 'long.
Mebbyso you makee fall in tlouble, China boy savee you, savee Matt,
savee evelbody. Huh?"
"Never you mind about Matt and me, Ping," returned McGlory. "You
stay right here—and stop fooling with that machinery, too. First thing
you know you'll have the Sprite turning a summerset, and that
would be about the worst thing that could happen to us. Stay right
here, mind, and wait until you hear from Matt or me before you
budge."
"Awri'," said Ping meekly.
McGlory crawled over the hood, got aboard the San Bruno, and then
stepped softly to the deck of the house boat.
A quick look around revealed the fact that Motor Matt was not in
evidence. Slipping forward along the port alley, the cowboy took a
hasty look through the lighted window. The three men were
smoking, and in close converse, but McGlory was more interested in
locating Motor Matt, just then, than in anything else.
Instead of returning toward the after end of the house boat, he
passed on to the patch of deck at the forward end—and was thus
out of the whirl of excitement that was turned on at the rear of the
craft.
The yell given by Kinky when he lifted the trap in the floor of the
cabin and caught a glimpse of Matt reached McGlory's ears almost
as soon as he had gained the wider deck at the end of the boat.
Almost immediately he heard the scramble inside the cabin, and
then the rush of feet aft.
He hesitated for a few seconds, not knowing what to do. Matt had
got into trouble, all right, but had he gotten out of it?
Stepping quickly to a door which led directly into the lighted front
room of the cabin, McGlory softly turned the knob and pushed the
door open. The room was empty. A trap in the floor was open, and
also a door leading into a dark room beyond. From somewhere
farther aft came angry voices and more sounds of scuffling.
"That means me, I reckon," thought the cowboy, rushing across the
lighted room and into the darker chamber farther on. It was his
intention to keep going and find out just what the struggle he had
been hearing might mean, and to do what he could for Motor Matt;
but he heard a sound behind him, just as he gained the darkness of
the rear room, which caused him to halt, turn cautiously, and peer
backward.
A tall, gangle-legged individual, with a mustache the color of dried
buffalo grass, a nose like a wart and eyes that looked like a couple
of wilted cactus blossoms, had entered the door which McGlory had
left open.
The manner of this person aroused the cowboy's interest and
curiosity. If he was one of the gang, what was he doing there? And
why was he acting in such a stealthy manner, as though in a hurry
and fearing to be apprehended?
McGlory, for a moment, curbed his desire to hurry on to the rear of
the house boat and stood and watched the stranger from the safe
screen of darkness.
The man was looking for something, that was plain. Dropping to his
knees, he reached under a bench at one side of the room. What he
wanted wasn't there. He turned to the bench on the other side and
gave an exultant grunt as he pulled a satchel from under it.
After flashing a wary look around him, he opened the satchel with
trembling fingers and drew forth a package of banknotes that made
McGlory stagger.
Money! George Lorry's money!
That is what the cowboy thought on the instant. With another
jubilant grunt, the stranger snapped the satchel shut and faded
through the front door. McGlory was about two seconds making up
his mind, and then faded after him.
The man was out of sight when the cowboy reached the deck at the
forward end of the boat. Heavy feet were coming through the dark
room of the cabin, and McGlory knew it was hardly safe for him to
stand in the exposed position where he had placed himself.
Wondering where the man had gone with the satchel and the
money, he stepped around the corner of the cabin into the starboard
passage—and saw the man just dodging around the opposite corner,
on the after deck.
"That's where I nail him!" thought McGlory, moving softly and swiftly
along the alley.
As he passed the lighted window on that side of the cabin a curtain
was jerked down, and a door was slammed. Following this, a key
grated in a lock. Then another door was slammed and another key
grated.
The cowboy hesitated, trying to guess whether all that had anything
to do with the man who was making off with the satchel. Unable to
reach any conclusion, and convinced that his duty lay in following
the man, McGlory moved noiselessly onward.
The light on the upright staff of the houseboat cast a faint glow on
the after deck, and here McGlory saw the man he was following
again on his knees and examining the packet of bills.
In two jumps the cowboy was on the man's back.
"Steady!" he hissed in the man's ear.
The fellow began to struggle; and then, in a flash, the cowboy
remembered the revolver he had snatched out of his cousin's hand
and slipped into his pocket. In a twinkling he had the weapon out of
the pocket—and commanded the situation.
"Don't shoot!" whined the man. "Great guns, I ain't done anythin' to
you."
"Put that bunch of green goods back into the grip," ordered McGlory.
"Thar she goes," said the man, letting the packet fall into the
satchel.
"Now give the grip a shove," continued McGlory, "so it'll be closer to
where I'm standing. That's the idea," he added, as the bag came
sliding toward him. "Now, pardner, I've got the money and you've
got the experience, and things are looking real fine. Who are you,
anyhow?"
"Landers," said the man. "I'm in charge o' this boat for Big John."
"Big John, eh? I wonder if that's my friend, Mr. Smith, otherwise
Red-whiskers?"
"That's him," answered Landers, "but you ain't no friend o' his, I'll
gamble."
"Ain't I?" queried McGlory humorously.
"You're a detective, an' you've come here to bag Big John an' them
other coves. But you don't need to bag me. I was only gettin' the
money to turn it over to the police."
"Oh, speak to me about that!" chuckled McGlory.
"Look out behind ye!" whispered Landers hoarsely. "Big John is——"
McGlory turned. As he did so, Landers fell off the house boat and
into the cockpit of the San Bruno.
"Ain't I easy?" grumbled McGlory, marking a half run across the deck
in the direction of the launch. "No," he muttered, "I won't do that,
either. I've got the ten thousand plunks belongin' to Uncle Dan, and
I guess I'll freeze onto 'em. Matt needs me, I reckon. With the grip
in one hand and George's pepper box in the other, I'll walk through
the cabin and see what I can do for this new pard of mine."
The rear door of the cabin was unlocked. McGlory passed through it
and groped his way in the dark to the other door.
He had barely reached the door when another commotion assailed
his ears, accompanied by loud voices. The voices were so loud, in
fact, that the cowboy could hear distinctly all that was said.
Big John had just discovered the loss of the satchel, and a violent
scene was threatening. Then came the popping of the motor, and
the rush to get out of the cabin and pursue Landers.
McGlory, beginning to understand what had happened and how the
thieves had been fooled, leaned against the wall of the cabin and
sputtered with merriment.
"Speak to me about luck, will you?" he gasped. "This is once,
anyhow, that I've got the winning number. I reckon it's because I'm
hooked up with Motor Matt."
He tried the bulkhead door, but found it locked. With a sudden
thought, he returned to the other door, took the key he found there
from the lock and tried it in the lock of the bulkhead door. It worked
like a charm, and McGlory, satchel in one hand and revolver in the
other, pushed into the lighted room.
At the very least, he was expecting to find Motor Matt on the floor,
tied hand and foot. McGlory's astonishment was great, therefore,
when he discovered that Matt was not in the room. A form stood just
outside the door, on the forward deck, vaguely outlined in the
darkness.
It was Matt, there was no doubt about it. Thoughts of the way
events had shaped themselves to befool the thieves rushed over the
cowboy again, and once more he dropped against the side of the
cabin. He exploded a laugh that brought Matt into the room at a
double quick, and held him, just inside the door, staring as though at
a ghost.
"McGlory!" muttered Matt, rubbing his eyes.
"Keno, correct—and more, much more. It's McGlory, Matt, and
McGlory's got the dinero. Come to me, put your little hand in mine
for a good shake, and let's felicitate. This will be happy news for
Cousin George!"
 CHAPTER XIII.
WAITING AND WORRYING.
"In the name of all that's good, Joe," cried Matt, as he and the
cowboy shook hands, "where did you come from?"
"From the Sprite, pard," grinned McGlory. "But that was some sort of
a while ago. I've been on the house boat for quite a spell."
"Where did you get that satchel?"
"It's got the bundle of money in it, Matt—Uncle Dan's money sabe?"
"Yes, yes, I know! I saw the red-whiskered man take the money out
of the satchel, then put it back again and push the satchel under
that bench. But how did you get hold of it? That's what I want to
know."
McGlory dropped the satchel and collapsed on the bench.
"Oh, that's the best ever," he laughed. "Those old hardshells were
fooled at their own game. Queer about that money of Uncle Dan's.
It's been in a good deal of a taking ever since it left Madison. George
takes it from Uncle Dan, Red-whiskers takes it from George, Landers
takes it from Red-whiskers, and now here's me taking it from
Landers."
"Landers?" queried Mitt. "Did he take the money?"
"Took it the length of the boat. By then I was close enough to get
hold of it myself. But you cut loose and tell me what went crossways
with you—I've been worried a heap about that—and then I'll even
up by tellin' how I jumped into the game."
Matt made short work of his end of the explanation, and McGlory
consumed but little more time. While McGlory was talking, Matt was
not only listening but also putting two and two together in his own
mind.
The cowboy finished with another jubilant laugh, but Matt suddenly
became grave and got up from the bench.
"Let's go outside, Joe," said he, "where we can keep an eye on our
surroundings."
"What's there in our surroundings to worry us? We've got the
money, haven't we?"
"Yes, but the 'taking' you mentioned a few minutes ago may keep up
—unless we're on the alert. Suppose Big John, Kinky, and Ross come
back here in the San Bruno? What would happen then? We haven't
any Sprite to take us off, remember."
"That's a fact," and McGlory went suddenly grave himself. "What
ever came over that chink to run off? Say, I'll bet he got to tinkering
with the motor, and that it started on him and he couldn't stop it.
Consarn these chinks, anyhow!"
"Don't be too quick to blame Ping, Joe," remonstrated Matt. "I don't
think that's what happened."
"What then?"
"Landers thought you were a detective, didn't he?"
"That's what he said."
"Well, he was afraid of being arrested and jailed for helping Big John
and the other two. That's the reason he played a trick and tumbled
off the boat."
"Well? Go on, pard, and give me the rest of it."
"Don't you think it's likely that he climbed aboard the Sprite, took
her away from Ping, and then rushed her across the cove to the
nearest landing?"
"Oh, tell me!" muttered McGlory. "And I never, no, I never once let
that drift into my head! And yet, why not? Wasn't it the natural thing
for Landers to do? Any day you can find in the almanac, pard, I'm
shy something when it comes to headwork. But here's the point:
Can Landers run the Sprite fast enough to keep her away from the
San Bruno? If he can't, I can see what will happen to Ping and
Landers when that outfit of fire-eaters come up with them. Oh,
shucks! This ain't turnin' out so pleasant as I thought. Suppose we
hike for the deck and keep our eyes peeled. It may save us
something, although I'm a heathen if I see what we could do if the
San Bruno came back."
"If we have to," said Matt, "we'll take the money and swim to the
nearest house boat."
"It will be a damp roll of bills we take ashore with us if we have to
do that."
"Better a lot of wet money, Joe, than no money at all."
"Right, exactly right, as per usual. I've got this pop-gun of Cousin
George's. It looks like one of those toy Fourth of July things that
make a noise and let it go at that. Still, maybe the sight of the thing
would scare somebody."
Together they left the cabin, and, in order that their view might be
more extensive, climbed the steep stairs to the house boat's upper
deck. Here there were comfortable chairs, and the boys sat down
and allowed their eyes to wander about them over the shadowy
surface of the cove.
The lights of the house-boat settlement were still gleaming in every
direction, but every sound had died away and a dead silence
reigned.
"If a launch was coming," said McGlory, "we could hear her a mile
off—which is three times as far as we could see her."
"That's right," said Matt, "and I'm hearing one now. Listen! Unless
I'm away off in my reckoning a boat is bearing this way from the
direction of Tiburon."
McGlory bent his head.
"You've made a bull's-eye, Matt," said he. "A boat's coming, but is it
the Sprite or the San Bruno?"
"It's the San Bruno," averred Matt.
"How do you make that out?" queried the wondering cowboy.
"Why, a bigger volume of sound, distance considered, than the
Sprite makes. I noticed that particularly when we were chasing the
San Bruno across the bay."
"Well, you've got me beat, plumb. We've got to swim, I reckon,
going off one side of the house boat as the launch ties up at the
other?"
"We'll not take to the water until we have to, Joe. Wait until we can
get a good look at the boat."
Standing on the upper deck, the two boys faced in the direction of
the approaching launch, and waited and worried.
Slowly, and after a period of time that seemed interminable, a blot of
shadow came gliding toward them from among the clustered lights
of the house boats.
Matt whirled to grip McGlory's arm.
"What's to pay now, pard?" asked the startled cowboy.
"Why," answered Matt, "two boats are coming!"
"Two?" echoed McGlory, squinting in the direction of the moving
blot. "I can't make out more than one, and it's plenty hard to see
that."
"One is chasing the other—I can tell by the sounds, alone."
"Good ear—remarkable. Put a lot of bronks on a hard trail and I can
shut my eyes and tell you how many there are, up to five, by
listening. But a boat's a different proposition. How do you know one
is chasing the other, though? That's what gets me."
"Because," answered Matt, "the boat ahead is the Sprite and the one
behind is the San Bruno!"
"Sufferin' whirligigs!" exclaimed McGlory. "How far ahead is the
Sprite?"
"We can tell in a minute. Both boats are close—and the San Bruno
has put out her light. Ah, look!"
Matt leaned over the rail and pointed. By that time the boats could
be easily distinguished. The Sprite was pounding along in a
distressing way that proved there was something wrong with her
sparking apparatus or her fuel supply, but, in spite of that, she was
doing nobly.
"It can't be that Ping is doing the work on the Sprite," muttered
McGlory.
"It sounds as though it might be Ping," said Matt.
"But he can't run the boat! Didn't we see him try, at the Tiburon
landing?"
"He's been watching me, and I think he's learned what to pull and
push and turn in order to keep the boat moving. A Chinaman is a
good imitator, Joe. The San Bruno is giving our launch a close race,
and we'd better go down and stand ready to leap aboard the
moment Ping stops for us."
Hurrying down the steps, the two boys placed themselves at the
edge of the house boat's after deck, ready to jump the moment the
Sprite came close enough.
 CHAPTER XIV.
PING STARS HIMSELF.
Ping was not impatient, while waiting for Matt and McGlory to come
back from the house boat, and he was not worrying. His callow mind
was engaged with the wheels and levers of the Sprite's machinery,
and he might be said to be enjoying himself, in his artless, heathen
way.
His first acquaintance with the Sprite had not been of a pleasant
nature, but Ping had overcome his awe and fear, to a large extent,
by watching how readily the boat obeyed the touch of Motor Matt's
hands.
The Chinese boy had observed all the details of starting, steering,
and stopping. Sitting alone in the launch, he touched the various
levers in proper order, again and again—touched them lightly, for he
had no desire to make the boat turn a "summerset," as McGlory had
said she would do if he got too free with his attentions.
The uproar and commotion that started abruptly on the house boat
and continued at intervals for some time, naturally drew the
Chinaman's eyes across the San Bruno. But the attraction of the
motor was too much for Ping to withstand, and he jumped at a
conclusion to assure himself that everything was well with Matt and
McGlory, and returned to his childlike interest in the machinery.
Some one scrambled off the San Bruno into the Sprite. The rough
boarding of the little launch caused her to sway and shiver and
dance at the end of her painter.
"You makee plenty fuss, McGloly!" complained Ping, grabbing at the
sides of the boat to hold himself upright.
Welcome to our website – the perfect destination for book lovers and
knowledge seekers. We believe that every book holds a new world,
offering opportunities for learning, discovery, and personal growth.
That’s why we are dedicated to bringing you a diverse collection of
books, ranging from classic literature and specialized publications to
self-development guides and children's books.

More than just a book-buying platform, we strive to be a bridge

connecting you with timeless cultural and intellectual values. With an
elegant, user-friendly interface and a smart search system, you can
quickly find the books that best suit your interests. Additionally,
our special promotions and home delivery services help you save time
and fully enjoy the joy of reading.

Join us on a journey of knowledge exploration, passion nurturing, and

personal growth every day!

ebookbell.com